20
$\begingroup$

It was proved by Jacques Dixmier (Sur les représentations unitaires des groupes de Lie algébriques, Annales de l'institut Fourier, 7 (1957), p. 315-328, doi: 10.5802/aif.73, MR 20 #5820, Zbl 0080.32101)

that algebraic groups over the reals, are type I. Is a similar result known for algebraic groups over non-archimedean local fields (possibly of characteristic 0)? I am only aware of the result by Bernstein

http://www.math.tau.ac.il/~bernstei/Publication_list/publication_texts/bernstein-P-tame-FAN.pdf

that reductive algebraic groups over non-archimedean local fields, are type I.

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ Your first link doesn't work for me:( $\endgroup$
    – Marc Palm
    Apr 17, 2013 at 12:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Marc: Yes there is something weird with the link, that I couldn't fix. I put the reference instead. $\endgroup$ Apr 18, 2013 at 11:04
  • $\begingroup$ archive.numdam.org/ARCHIVE/AIF/AIF_1957__7_/AIF_1957__7__315_0/… $\endgroup$
    – Marc Palm
    Apr 18, 2013 at 11:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Alain: Note that Joseph Bernstein's name has an extra "n", though there is also a mathematician named Berstein. (To add to the name confusion, early English translations of Russian papers co-authored by Joseph Bernstein gave his initials as I.N.) $\endgroup$ May 16, 2015 at 14:07
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Thanks to David for reviving my question of 2 years ago. My reason for asking was a computation (joint with Henrik Petersen) of $L^2$-Betti numbers for locally compact groups, valid under a type I assumption; see arxiv.org/pdf/1307.0379.pdf $\endgroup$ May 16, 2015 at 17:11

2 Answers 2

14
$\begingroup$

Duflo gave a classification of the irreducible unitary representations of any algebraic group over a characteristic zero local field, in terms of the answer in the reductive case (Duflo, Michel Théorie de Mackey pour les groupes de Lie algébriques. (French) [Mackey theory for algebraic Lie groups] Acta Math. 149 (1982), no. 3-4, 153–213.) My guess would be that the type I result in general follows from Bernstein's type I result in the reductive case by Duflo's classification; but I don't know that for certain, and Duflo does not state such a result.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The first question would be whether unipotent $p$-adic groups are all of type I. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    May 16, 2015 at 9:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @YCor: The answer is yes. unipotent p -adic groups are all CCR, in particular type I. See Theorem 4 "Decomposition of Unitary Representations Defined by Discrete Subgroups of Nilpotent Groups" by Calvin C. Moore jstor.org/stable/1970567?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents $\endgroup$
    – m07kl
    Jun 11, 2015 at 16:15
5
$\begingroup$

Theorem 1.2.3 (p18) of

MOHAMED HACHMI SLIMAN Théorie de Mackey pour les groupes adéliques Astérisque, tome 115 (1984) Link at SMF site

asserts that the $F$-points of linear algebraic groups over characteristic zero local fields $F$ are of type 1. The author states the result in a slightly more general setting that allows for some covering groups.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is far from holding in such a setting. In this theorem there are many assumptions on the field and on the algebraic group which you're omitting. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Jan 17, 2021 at 12:12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I am confused by this. In the original question the field is local so I didn't say that explicitly before. I don't see how you can't recover the statement I gave above by taking $G=G(F)$, $F=1$, and $\underline{\underline{G}}=G$ in the notation of the reference. $\endgroup$
    – jaycegetz
    Jan 18, 2021 at 23:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks for clarifying. Indeed I had the impression that more hypotheses were missing, but it seems indeed to hold in this setting (and "local field" in this book means "nondiscrete locally compact field"). $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Jan 18, 2021 at 23:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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