1
$\begingroup$

In a course on the character theory of finite groups, the professor defined the convolution and scalar product of complex functions $\alpha, \beta$ on a group $G$ by

$$(\alpha * \beta)(g) := \sum_{h \in G} \alpha(gh^{-1}) \beta(h); \qquad [\alpha, \beta] := \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{h \in G} \bar{\alpha}(h) \beta(h).$$

I vaguely understand that these are useful definitions because the irreducible characters of $G$ form an orthonormal basis for the space of class functions on $G$, so that we can decompose class functions in "character space," where it's presumably easier to deal with them, and where convolution corresponds roughly to multiplication.

I am to prove that $\alpha * \beta = \beta * \alpha$ for all $\beta$ iff $\alpha$ is a class function, and further that the space of class functions has dimension equal to the number of conjugacy classes, by considering the class functions $\phi_A$ (one for each conjugacy class $A$), defined to be 1 for $g \in A$ and 0 otherwise. This is supposedly an easy exercise, but I don't really understand what it's saying, why it should be true, or how it connects to my shaky understanding of what "character space" really is.

  • 1
    I love your alliterative title.2017-02-12
  • 0
    The first few pages of Serre's book on representation theory is a pretty self contained exposition of all this2017-02-12
  • 0
    $(\alpha * \beta)(g) = \sum_{h \in G} \alpha(gh^{-1}) \beta(h)$ while $k^{-1} g$ $( \beta*\alpha )(g) = \sum_{h \in G} \alpha(h) \beta(gh^{-1})=\sum_{k \in G} \alpha(k^{-1} g) \beta(g(k^{-1} g)^{-1})=\sum_{k \in G} \alpha(k^{-1} g) \beta(k)$ [and so](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_function_(algebra)) $\alpha(g h^{-1} ) =\alpha(k^{-1} g) \implies \alpha * \beta=\beta*\alpha$2017-02-13

1 Answers 1

0

After some laborious effort, this was the rather contrived proof I came up with. If anyone has a better way to do this, insight would be appreciated.

Proposition: $\alpha * \beta = \beta * \alpha$ if and only if $\alpha$ is a class function.

Proof. First of all, consider the class functions $\phi_A$, one for each class $A$, defined by \begin{equation} \phi_A(g) = \begin{cases} 1, &\text{if}\; g \in A; \\ 0, &\text{otherwise}. \end{cases} \end{equation}

Observe that the $\phi_A$ form a basis for $\breve{G}$, the space of class functions of $G$. Indeed, the span $\{\sum_{A \in \breve{G}} \lambda_A \phi_A\}$ covers all possible class functions, and the $\phi_A$ are independent as $\phi_A \neq \lambda \phi_{A'}$ for $A \neq A'$, since $\phi_A = 0$ on $A'$. That is, any class function $\gamma$ can be uniquely decomposed as $\gamma = \sum_{A \in \breve{G}} \lambda_A \phi_A$, as each $\gamma$ must be $\lambda_A = \lambda_A \cdot 1$ on each class.

We first assume that $\alpha$ is a class function and prove commutativity; then, we assume commutativity and show that $\alpha$ is a class function.

($\implies$) Assume that $\alpha$ is a class function: then by the above decomposition, it suffices to prove that $(\beta * \phi_A)(g) = (\phi_A * \beta)(g)$ for an arbitrary class $A$, since then $\alpha$ can be pieced together from its components. Let's compute: letting $f = gh^{-1} \iff h = f^{-1} g$, we have \begin{align} (\beta * \phi_A)(g) = \sum_{k \in G} \beta(gk^{-1}) \phi_A(k) = \lambda_A \sum_{k \in A} \beta(gk^{-1}); \notag \\ (\phi_A * \beta)(g) = \sum_{h \in G} \phi_A(gh^{-1}) \beta(h) = \sum_{f \in G} \phi_A(f) \beta(f^{-1}g) = \lambda_A \sum_{f \in A} \beta(f^{-1}g). \end{align}

So it remains to show that every $f^{-1} g$ can be written uniquely as $gk^{-1}$ for some $k \in A$; indeed, define such a $k$ by $f = gkg^{-1}$, so that $f^{-1}g = gk^{-1}$.

($\impliedby$) Suppose first that $\alpha$ is not a class function; that is, assume that on some conjugacy class $A$, $\alpha$ is not constant. In other words, $\exists a,b \in A \mid \alpha(a) \neq \alpha(b)$ and $a \sim b \iff a = gbg^{-1}$ for some $g \in G$. Now, assume that $(\alpha * \beta)(g) = (\beta * \alpha)(g)$. By definition, we have

\begin{align} (\alpha * \beta)(g) = \sum_{f \in G} \alpha(gf^{-1}) \beta(f); \qquad (\beta * \alpha)(g) = \sum_{h \in G} \beta(gh^{-1}) \alpha(h). \end{align}

Next, we set $fh = g$ to re-index the first sum: then $gf^{-1} = ghg^{-1}$, and consequently $(\alpha * \beta)(g) = \sum_{h \in G} \alpha(ghg^{-1}) \beta(gh^{-1})$. Requiring $[(\beta * \alpha) - (\alpha * \beta)](g) = 0$, we have

\begin{equation} \sum_{h \in G} [\alpha(ghg^{-1}) - \alpha(h)] \beta(gh^{-1}) = 0. \end{equation}

We can break up the sum as follows:

\begin{equation} \label{big hoss} [\alpha(gbg^{-1}) - \alpha(b)] \beta(gb^{-1}) + \sum_{\substack{h \in G \\ h \neq b}} [\alpha(ghg^{-1}) - \alpha(h)] \beta(gh^{-1}) = 0. \end{equation}

Now consider any complex function $\beta_0 \colon G \to \mathbb{C}$, and define $\beta_1 \colon G \to \mathbb{C}$ by

\begin{equation} \beta_1(k) := \begin{cases} \beta_0(k), &\text{if}\; k \neq gb^{-1}; \\ X \neq \beta_0(k), &\text{otherwise}. \end{cases} \end{equation}

Okay: time for some voodoo. We plug in $\beta_0$ for $\beta$ in the above, then plug in $\beta_1$ for $\beta$ in the same, and finally subtract the results. The $h \neq b$ terms cancel, and we are left with \begin{equation} (\alpha(gbg^{-1}) - \alpha(b)) (\beta_0(gb^{-1}) - \beta_1(gb^{-1})) \end{equation}

The second term is clearly nonzero by construction, but the first term gives a contradiction: it must be zero, yet $a = gbg^{-1} \neq b$, so that $(\alpha(a) - \alpha(b) \neq 0$. Hence the assumption that $\alpha$ is not a class function must be false, so indeed we are done. $\boxtimes$

  • 0
    I think you can make it shorter and more conceptual by noting that it suffices to replace "for all $\beta$" by "for all $\beta$ in a basis" and then consider the basis given by taking an indicator function for each group element. Now note that these are are invertible under the convolution to turn the identity into a conjugation. Finally see what happens when you compare the value of a function at a conjugate with the conjugate of the function with the corresponding indicator function.2017-02-13