johncarlosbaez, (edited )
@johncarlosbaez@mathstodon.xyz avatar

@pschwahn @AxelBoldt - right, that's one way to proceed. I've been doing a lot of work lately with representations of GL(n,𝔽) for 𝔽 an arbitrary field of characteristic zero. For subfields of ℂ this trick of complexifying and reducing to the case 𝔽 = ℂ works fine. But in fact the representation theory works exactly the same way even for fields of characteristic zero that aren't subfields of ℂ!

It's not that I really care about such fields. I just find it esthetically annoying to work only with subfields of ℂ when dealing with something that's purely algebraic and shouldn't really involve the complex numbers. So I had to learn a bit about how we can develop the representation theory of GL(n,𝔽) for an arbitrary field of characteristic zero. Milne's book 𝐴𝑙𝑔𝑒𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑐 𝐺𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝𝑠 does this, and a preliminary version is free:

https://www.jmilne.org/math/CourseNotes/iAG200.pdf

but unfortunately it's quite elaborate if all you want is the basics of the representation theory of GL(n,𝔽).

(For 𝔽 not of characteristic zero everything changes dramatically, since you can't symmetrize by dividing by n!. Nobody even knows all the irreps of the symmetric groups.)

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • ngwrru68w68
  • rosin
  • GTA5RPClips
  • osvaldo12
  • love
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • khanakhh
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • mdbf
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • megavids
  • InstantRegret
  • normalnudes
  • tacticalgear
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • modclub
  • cisconetworking
  • Durango
  • anitta
  • Leos
  • tester
  • provamag3
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines