Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
0 of .
Results for:
P. 1
Schur's lemma

# Schur's lemma

Ratings: (0)|Views: 5 |Likes:
Schur's lemma
Schur's lemma

### Availability:

See more
See less

01/10/2013

pdf

text

original

Schur's lemma1
Schur's lemma
In mathematics,
Schur's lemma
[1]
is an elementary but extremely useful statement in representation theory of groups and algebras. In the group case it says that if
M
and
N
are two finite-dimensional irreducible representationsof a group
G
and
φ
is a linear map from
M
to
N
that commutes with the action of the group, then either
φ
isinvertible, or
φ
= 0. An important special case occurs when
M
=
N
and
φ
is a self-map. The lemma is named afterIssai Schur who used it to prove Schur orthogonality relations and develop the basics of the representation theory of finite groups. Schur's lemma admits generalisations to Lie groups and Lie algebras, the most common of which isdue to Jacques Dixmier.
Formulation in the language of modules
If
M
and
N
are two simple modules over a ring
R
, then any homomorphism
f
:
M

N
of
R
-modules is eitherinvertible or zero. In particular, the endomorphism ring of a simple module is a division ring.
[2]
The condition that
f
is a module homomorphism means thatThe group version is a special case of the module version, since any representation of a group
G
can equivalently beviewed as a module over the group ring of
G
.Schur's lemma is frequently applied in the following particular case. Suppose that
R
is an algebra over the field
C
of complex numbers and
M
=
N
is a finite-dimensional simple module over
R
. Then Schur's lemma says that theendomorphism ring of the module
M
is a division ring; this division ring contains
C
in its center, isfinite-dimensional over
C
and is therefore equal to
C
. Thus the endomorphism ring of the module
M
is "as small aspossible". More generally, this result holds for algebras over any algebraically closed field and for simple modulesthat are at most countably-dimensional. When the field is not algebraically closed, the case where the endomorphismring is as small as possible is of particular interest: A simple module over
-algebra is said to be absolutely simple if its endomorphism ring is isomorphic to
. This is in general stronger than being irreducible over the field
, andimplies the module is irreducible even over the algebraic closure of
.
Matrix form
Let
G
be a complex matrix group. This means that
G
is a set of square matrices of a given order
n
with complexentries and
G
is closed under matrix multiplication and inversion. Further, suppose that
G
is
irreducible
: there is nosubspace
other than 0 and the whole space which is invariant under the action of
G
. In other words,Schur's lemma, in the special case of a single representation, says the following. If
A
is a complex matrix of order
n
that commutes with all matrices from
G
then
A
is a scalar matrix. If
G
is not irreducible, then this is not true. Forexample, if one takes the subgroup
D
of diagonal matrices inside of GL(
n
,
C
), then the center of
D
is
D
, whichcontains non scalar matrices. As a simple corollary, every complex irreducible representation of Abelian groups isone-dimensional.See also Schur complement.

Schur's lemma2
Generalization to non-simple modules
The one module version of Schur's lemma admits generalizations involving modules
M
that are not necessarilysimple. They express relations between the module-theoretic properties of
M
and the properties of the endomorphismring of
M
.A module is said to be
strongly indecomposable
if its endomorphism ring is a local ring. For the important class of modules of finite length, the following properties are equivalent (Lam 2001, §19):A module
M
is indecomposable;
M
is strongly indecomposable;Every endomorphism of
M
is either nilpotent or invertible.In general, Schur's lemma cannot be reversed: there exist modules that are not simple, yet their endomorphismalgebra is a division ring. Such modules are necessarily indecomposable, and so cannot exist over semi-simple ringssuch as the complex group ring of a finite group. However, even over the ring of integers, the module of rationalnumbers has an endomorphism ring that is a division ring, specifically the field of rational numbers. Even for grouprings, there are examples when the characteristic of the field divides the order of the group: the Jacobson radical of the projective cover of the one-dimensional representation of the alternating group on five points over the field withthree elements has the field with three elements as its endomorphism ring.
Notes
[1]Issai Schur (1905) "Neue Begründung der Theorie der Gruppencharaktere" (http:/

/

books.

com/

books?id=KwUoAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA406&

#v=onepage&

q&

f=false) (New foundation for the theory of group characters),
Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin
, pages 406-432.[2]Lam (2001), p. 33 (http:/

/

books.

com/

books?id=f15FyZuZ3-4C&

pg=PA33&

dq="Schur's+

Lemma").
References
David S. Dummit, Richard M. Foote.
Abstract Algebra.
2nd ed., pg. 337.Lam, Tsit-Yuen (2001),
A First Course in Noncommutative Rings
, Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag,ISBN 978-0-387-95325-0