Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've read about inducing representations of H modules to G modules, where H is a subgroup of G. If the H module has a hermitian form on it (hermitian with respect to the involution on k[H] sending h->h^{-1} ), does there exist a compatible hermitian form on the G module ?

Are there any references for this topic at a beginner's level ?

share|improve this question
I think you would have more success here if you would define what "Hermitian with respect to an involution" means. –  darij grinberg Mar 24 '11 at 10:12
I think one can always look at the normalized induction (by modular character of H) to make sure that induction functor preserves unitary representations. –  user22195 Mar 16 '12 at 18:19
Since the question has been bumped: some more background on what kinds of group (finite? compact? locally compact?) and what kinds of ground field (characteristic zero? complex?) might help people to give useful suggestions. –  Yemon Choi Mar 16 '12 at 22:43
add comment

1 Answer

I interpret the question as whether induced representation of unitarizable representation are unitarizable.

This is true, when $G$ is a locally compact group and $H$ a closed subgroup. It's due to Mackey. The construction involves a (quasi invariant) measure on $H \backslash G$, which behaves nicely under right translation.

For the measure: The existence of the measure is shown in Folland "Harmonic analysis", but he focuses soon thereafter on the compact case. I do not know of any other textbook, which has reference with proofs for this.

For the induced representation: Barut and Raczka "The theory of group representation ... " do quite a good job in the general case, but omit many proofs and have a cumbersome notation (adopted from Mackey's paper).

At a beginner's level? For compact groups, there are more reference. But I think that there a not so many sources, which explain Mackey's theory in general, and none at a beginners level. I suggest to learn a lot of finite/compact group stuff, before going to the more general settings, and consider induction and restriction as functor.

Attention: There are also non-unitarizable representations of $H$, which become unitarizabile after induction. The complementary series representations are examples.

For a finite group and there representation on characteristic zero fields, you can also write down the canonical inner product yourself, its $$\langle f(g), h(g) \rangle_G = \sum\limits_{H \backslash G} \langle f(g), h(g) \rangle_H,$$ and the well-behavedness in your question with respect to the action makes it well-defined. Perhaps you have learnt the tensor approach first, where this choice is not so obvious, but for function on $G$, this choice is obvious.

In characteristic $p$ the inner product can of course be non-degenerate for obvious reasons.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.