0
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathcal{A} = \{V : \mathbb{U}_n \rightarrow \mathbb{C}\}$ where $\mathbb{U}_n$ is the group of the complex $n$-th roots of the unity. This group naturally acts on $\mathcal{A}$: for any $a \in \mathbb{U}_n$, and any $V \in \mathcal{A}$ $$ \begin{equation*} (a \star V) : b \mapsto V(a^{-1}b) \end{equation*} $$ I define $Fix(V) = \{a \in \mathbb{U}_n,~ a \star V = V\}$ the symmetry group of $V$.

My question is: can we define an equivariant function $\lambda : \mathcal{A} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ which measures the "asymmetry" of $V$, i.e., a function such that for all $a,V$ $$ \begin{align*} \lambda(a \star V) &= a \lambda(V) \\ \lambda(V) = 0 &\Leftrightarrow Fix(V) \neq \{1\} \end{align*} $$

Is it related to some known problem ? Satisfying the first condition is ok, for instance $$ \begin{equation*} \lambda_0(V) = \sum_{z \in \mathbb{U}_n} z V(z) \end{equation*} $$ but the second condition is not ok. Indeed, it suffices to take $V$ as the indicator function of, say, the union of a triangle and a square (in a suitable $\mathbb{U}_n$). The sum above is zero but this $V$ has a trivial symmetry group.

Thank you.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Is there a typo? Do you mean $\lambda(V)=0 \Leftrightarrow Fix(V)\ne \{1\}$? The condition $Fix(V)\ne \{1\}$ at least implies $\lambda(V)=0$ under your equivariance assumption. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 6, 2015 at 8:02
  • $\begingroup$ You're right, I updated it. Thanks. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 6, 2015 at 14:14
  • $\begingroup$ Do you require $\lambda$ to be linear? $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Commented Feb 6, 2015 at 14:21
  • $\begingroup$ No, only the equivariance and the "asymmetry detection" are required. But I guess we could also look for a $\lambda$ taking values in something more intricate than $\mathbb{C}$ ... $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 6, 2015 at 14:26
  • $\begingroup$ Small remark: if $n$ is prime then I think Fix(V) is non-trivial iff it is the whole group iff V is constant, so you could take $\lambda(V)$ to be the variance of $V$. In general, would you be happy for $\lambda$ to depend on the arithmetic properties of $n$? $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Commented Feb 6, 2015 at 15:09

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .