14
votes
Why does group representation theory look linear?
A group in itself is not necessarily related to linear spaces. Representation theory (which is a subfield of group theory) is the study of the way in which groups act linearly on vector spaces : a ...
- 3,946
11
votes
Why does group representation theory look linear?
A group $G$ is an algebraic structure which encodes one pattern of composition of objects. This makes abstract the notion of transformations which may be composed to give new ones. The whole point, ...
- 29.5k
8
votes
Accepted
Basic Facts about Lie Algebras
Yes, OP is right: P&S do not distinguish between the abstract Lie group and its defining representation, which is usually the fundamental representation.
- 170k
5
votes
Help needed in understanding $2\otimes 2=1\oplus 1\oplus 2$ of $SO(2)$
You can parameterize a general $2\times 2$ matrix of real numbers in terms of 4 real numbers $t$, $a$, $s_1$, and $s_2$ as
\begin{equation}
A = \left(
\begin{array}
_ \frac{t}{2} + s_1 & s_2 + a \\...
- 34.3k
5
votes
Why does group representation theory look linear?
Concerning OP's title question Why does group representation theory look linear? it should be mentioned that there exist in physics (e.g. in the areas of spontaneous symmetry breaking and ...
- 170k
4
votes
Accepted
Invariants of inner product in pseudoreal representation of $SU(2)$
P&S are talking about the spinor/defining/fundamental representation $$\eta,\xi~\in~ V~\cong~ \mathbb{C}^2$$ of $SU(2)$.
The expression $\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\eta_{\alpha}\xi_{\beta}$ is $SU(2)$-...
- 170k
4
votes
Basic Facts about Lie Algebras
You learnt that in your group theory course, that sounds right. But you must consider the topology. Lie groups are manifolds, so they have tangent spaces (this is an additional structure to being a ...
- 141
4
votes
Accepted
Help needed in understanding $2\otimes 2=1\oplus 1\oplus 2$ of $SO(2)$
The "2" is the space of all trace-free symmetric rank-2 tensors. So an arbitrary tensor product of two vectors can be decomposed as
$$
A_i B_j = \frac{1}{2} \delta_{ij} A_k B_k + \frac{1}{2}...
- 38.3k
3
votes
Help needed in understanding $2\otimes 2=1\oplus 1\oplus 2$ of $SO(2)$
Any $2\times2$ matrix (4 dof) can be broken up into its trace part (1 dof), an antisymmetric part (1 dof) and a symmetric traceless part (2 dof). Hence, $2\times 2=4=1+1+2$.
- 21k
3
votes
Confusion in group theory at the example of the Lie algebra $su(2)$
Yes, the $T_i$ are supposed to be a basis of the algebra as a vector space. Therefore, choosing n-by-n matrices $\rho(T_i)$ that represent each of the $T_i$ defines a linear map $\rho : \mathfrak{su}(...
- 107k
2
votes
Accepted
Abstract definition of four-vector
95% correct, let me add some elements.
We define the "mathematical Minkowski spacetime" as the vector space $\mathbb R^4$ endowded with a bilinear form we denote by $\eta$ ("mostly ...
- 3,848
2
votes
Invariants of inner product in pseudoreal representation of $SU(2)$
I would like add to Qmechanic's excellent answer a bit of context from the practical point of view.
Apparently the question arises in classical Quantum mechanics not accounting for relativity. So then ...
- 6,448
2
votes
Importance of raising/lowering/ladder operators
That is just the thing about quantum mechanics. It is based on the fundamental principle that interactions involve the exchange of quanta. As a result of this principle each particle field taking part ...
- 12k
1
vote
Clebsch-Gordan Series and Rotation Matrices
The rotation operator
\begin{align}
D(R)=e^{i\vec \omega\cdot \vec L}&
=e^{i\vec \omega \cdot(\vec L^{(1)}+\vec L^{(2)})} = e^{i\vec \omega \cdot\vec L^{(1)}}e^{i\vec \omega \cdot\vec L^{(2)}}\, ,\...
- 38.8k
1
vote
From a quant-info perspective why are the reals indexing irreps of the Lorentz group less suspect than continuousness in space-time and general QM?
The UV infinities in perturbative QFT is a mathematical artifact coming from the indiscriminate use of distributions. In causal perturbation theory, where more careful use of distributions is made, ...
- 12.1k
1
vote
A relation for adjoint representation of $U(N)$ acting on product of matrices and $SU(2)$ generators
Here is a partial remark on a special case that might help you get started on your problem, where everything is completely calculable directly.
Take the case of N=2, where you might as well normalize ...
- 48.1k
1
vote
Importance of raising/lowering/ladder operators
The construction of raising and lowering operator is very natural when there is an underlying Lie algebra. Thus yes there's some systematic way of constructing them. In fact, if the Lie algebra is ...
- 38.8k
1
vote
Confusion in group theory at the example of the Lie algebra $su(2)$
...and wouldn't then linear combinations of them yield new representation?
Not necessarily. Suppose you have a representation in matrix form like:
$$
[M_i, M_j] = i\epsilon_{ijk}M_k
$$
A linear ...
- 7,589
1
vote
Accepted
Constructing gauge invariants
I am using this reference,
Spin Multiplicities, T Curtright, T van Kortryk, and C Zachos, Phys Lett A381 (2017) 422-427.
The character of a spin j, dimension 2j+1 irrep of SU(2) is
$$
\chi_j (\theta)...
- 48.1k
1
vote
Why does group representation theory look linear?
Linearity is no restriction in the following sense: Every compact Lie group $G$ (in particular every finite group) has a faithful finite-dimensional linear representation, see the Peter-Weyl-theorem. ...
- 111
Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible