bio | website | math.umd.edu/~jda |
---|---|---|
location | ||
age | ||
visits | member for | 5 years, 3 months |
seen | Aug 10 at 1:26 | |
stats | profile views | 770 |
Jun
23 |
revised |
Real and Quaternionic Representations according to Weights
tiny misprints; missing "finite dimensional" before the proposition |
Jun
21 |
answered | Real and Quaternionic Representations according to Weights |
Jan
7 |
answered | Topological properties of $K$ orbits in $G/B$ |
Jan
7 |
awarded | Yearling |
Jan
7 |
answered | Rational Points of a Quotient of a Reductive Group by a Parabolic Subgroup |
Dec
16 |
awarded | Necromancer |
Dec
10 |
awarded | Revival |
Dec
10 |
answered | reference help indecomposable representations of SL(2,R) |
Dec
5 |
comment |
Unitary dual of $Sp_4(\mathbb{R})$
See the answer to: mathoverflow.net/questions/84624 |
Aug
29 |
awarded | Nice Question |
Jul
21 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
Jun
26 |
comment |
comprehensive presentation of the unitary dual of $SO_0(n,1)$
Also see the Math Overflow question mathoverflow.net/questions/84762 |
May
4 |
revised |
Simply connected algebraic groups and reductive subgroups of maximal rank
deleted 7 characters in body |
May
1 |
revised |
Simply connected algebraic groups and reductive subgroups of maximal rank
removed example which wasn't equal rank |
May
1 |
answered | Simply connected algebraic groups and reductive subgroups of maximal rank |
Apr
30 |
answered | Finite Order Automorphisms on Complex Simple Lie Algebras |
Apr
23 |
awarded | Nice Question |
May
11 |
awarded | Yearling |
Feb
22 |
comment |
Character determines the representation?
Sorry, my mistake; what is more difficult is that the character is given by a locally summable function (not that the character determines the representation). Thanks for the reference and clarification. |
Feb
16 |
comment |
Character determines the representation?
The theorem is proved in the book by Harish-Chandra and van Dijk, but only for linear groups. I'm not an expert in the p-adic case, but my vague recollection is there is a nontrivial technical issue towards the end that requires linearity. The proof in Jacquet Langlands is only for GL(2), at least as stated. Maybe an expert can enlighten us. |