8
$\begingroup$

Let $G$ be a finite group, and let $K$ be a field of characteristic zero. Let $\phi(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ be a first order formula in the language of group theory (so $\phi$ can be for example something of the form $\exists y\in G$ $y^2=x$ or $\exists y_1,y_2\in G $ $ x_1=y_1y_2,x_2=y_2y_1$). For every such formula $\phi$ we consider the element $$t_{\phi}:=\sum_{\{(g_1,\ldots g_n)\in G^n| \phi(g_1,\ldots g_n)\}}g_1\otimes g_2\otimes\cdots\otimes g_n$$ In other words, $t_{\phi}$ is the sum over all tuples who satisfy the formula $\phi$. If now $\mu:G\to G$ is a group automorphism, then $\phi(g_1,\ldots,g_n)$ holds if and only if $\phi(\mu(g_1),\ldots,\mu(g_n))$ holds. It thus follows that the elements $t_{\phi}$ are all $Aut(G)$-invariants inside $(KG)^{\otimes n}$.

Is there an elementary proof that the elements $t_{\phi}$ span the invariant subspace $(KG^{\otimes n})^{Aut(G)}$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hi Udi. Could you please clarify your question, as the formulation of the last sentence suggests two different interpretations: 1. you don't know that the $t_\phi$'s span the space. 2. you know this, you even have have a proof, but it is not elementary. $\endgroup$ – Uri Bader Jun 16 '17 at 12:19
  • $\begingroup$ Hi Uri. It is the second case. I have a long proof using symmetric monoidal categories and geometric invariant theory. This follows from Theorem 1.5 in arxiv.org/pdf/1506.00314.pdf (you need to apply the theorem to group algebras and understand the relation with first order formulas). I want to understand how to prove this directly. $\endgroup$ – Ehud Meir Jun 16 '17 at 12:28
5
$\begingroup$

The assumption on the characteristic of $K$ implies that $(KG^{\otimes n})^{Aut(G)}$ is spanned by the indicator functions of the $Aut(G)$-orbits in $G^n$. So it suffices to observe that for every $(g_1,\dots,g_n) \in G^n$ the formula "$(x_1,\dots,x_n)$ belongs to the $Aut(G)$-orbit of $(g_1,\dots,g_n)$" is a first-order formula.

But (if I remember correctly what a first-order formula is) this is clear, as it can be written as "$\exists (y_g)_{g \in G} \in G, y_{g h}=y_{g}y_h, y_g \neq y_h$ if $g \neq h$ and $y_{g_i} = x_i$".

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The first sentence of my answer is misleading: the fact that the invariant space is spanned by the indicator functions of the orbits has nothing to do with the characteristic of $K $ and holds in full generality. So does the rest of the argument. $\endgroup$ – Mikael de la Salle Jun 18 '17 at 5:28

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.