# Orthogonality of invariant subspaces for restricted representations [closed]

Let $G$ be a finite group and $H_1$ and $H_2$ are two proper subgroups of $G$. Also, let $\rho:G \rightarrow \mathbb{C}^m \times \mathbb{C}^m$ be an irreducible non-trivial representation of $G$. Let $V_1$ and $V_2$ be subspaces of $\mathbb{C}^m$ such that $V_1 \cap V_2=0$. Further, $V_1$ is the maximal subspace such that for every element $h_1 \in H_1$ and $v \in V_1$, $\rho(h_1) v = v$. Similarly, $V_2$ is the maximal subspace such that for every element $h_2 \in H_2$ and $v \in V_2$, $\rho(h_2) v = v$.

Is it true that $V_1$ and $V_2$ are orthogonal to each other (w.r.t the standard inner product on $\mathbb{C}^m$) ? If not, can you provide a counterexample?

-

## closed as off-topic by Ricardo Andrade, Andrey Rekalo, Stefan Kohl, Chris Godsil, David WhiteNov 28 '13 at 15:57

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

• "This question does not appear to be about research level mathematics within the scope defined in the help center." – Ricardo Andrade, Andrey Rekalo, Stefan Kohl, Chris Godsil
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

orthogonal with respect to what? – Jonas Hartwig Nov 21 '10 at 20:05
@Jonas : orthogonal w.r.t. the standard inner product function. – Anindya De Nov 21 '10 at 20:52
What the hell is $\rho:G\to\mathbb C^m\times \mathbb C^m$ supposed to mean? Maybe $\rho:G\to \mathrm{End}\mathbb C^m$ ? – darij grinberg Nov 21 '10 at 20:57
Anyway, by the definition of $V_1$, an irrep of $G$ occurs in $V_1$ iff it occurs in $\mathbb C^m$ and trivializes $H_1$ (i. e., the group $H_1$ acts trivially in this irrep). Similarly, an irrep of $G$ occurs in $V_2$ iff it occurs in $\mathbb C^m$ and trivializes $H_2$ (i. e., the group $H_2$ acts trivially in this irrep). Thus, no irrep can occur in both $V_1$ and $V_2$ (because then it would trivialize both $H_1$ and $H_2$, and thus occur in $V_1\cap V_2$, contradicting $V_1\cap V_2=0$). Therefore, $V_1$ and $V_2$ are orthogonal with respect to any $G$-invariant (!) scalar product. – darij grinberg Nov 21 '10 at 21:03
Of course, they need not be orthogonal with respect to some random (e. g., standard) scalar product (in fact, there is no reason why the standard scalar product here should be better than any randomly chosen one - think of representations of $G$ as some vector spaces, not necessarily $\mathbb C^m$). – darij grinberg Nov 21 '10 at 21:04

No. Let $G$ be the dihedral group of order $6$ acting on its reflection representation $V_{\mathbb{R}}=\mathbb{R}^2$ (as symmetries of an equilateral triangle) and let $V$ be the complexification of this representation. Let $H_1$ and $H_2$ be the subgroups of order $2$ generated by distinct reflections. Then the fix spaces of $H_1$ and $H_2$ are not orthogonal wrt the $G$-inv. inner product, but they intersect trivially.