Timeline for Simultaneous "Monomialization" of a set of operators.
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 13, 2012 at 17:42 | comment | added | Will Sawin | I think the automorphism group of a nice lattice, like the $E_8$ lattice or the Leech lattice, with the standard representation, should give a counterexample. | |
| Nov 13, 2012 at 17:04 | comment | added | Will Sawin | One potential problem with the new condition is that every finite group representation satisfies it when you add enough trivial summands. I can't immediately think of an example of a finite group representation that cannot be put in this form after adding enough trivial summands, but it seems likely that one exists. | |
| Nov 13, 2012 at 16:22 | comment | added | Eric Rowell | Thanks Will! Including (a) was an afterthought that should have been removed upon further reflection. | |
| Nov 13, 2012 at 15:55 | history | answered | Will Sawin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |