3
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to find a reference or a proof to the following statement used by Matringe, N., 2012. Cuspidal representations of GL (n, F) distinguished by a maximal Levi subgroup, with F a non-archimedean local field. Comptes Rendus Mathematique, 350(17-18), pp.797-800. (used in the proof of Proposition 2.1/Proposition 3.1) and Kable, A.C., 2004. Asai L-functions and Jacquet's conjecture. American journal of mathematics, 126(4), pp.789-820. (used in the proof of Proposition 1).

Let $F$ be a $p$-adic field.

We denote by $P_n$ the subgroup of $ \mathrm{GL}_{n}\left(F\right) $ of matrices having $ \begin{pmatrix}0 & \dots & 0 & 1\end{pmatrix} $ as their last row.

We denote $G_{n-1}=\left\{ \begin{pmatrix}g\\ & 1 \end{pmatrix}\mid g\in\mathrm{GL}_{n-1}\left(F\right)\right\} $ and $ U_{n}=\left\{ \begin{pmatrix}I_{m-1} & v\\ & 1 \end{pmatrix}\mid v\in F^{m-1}\right\} $. It is known that $ P_{n}=G_{n-1}\ltimes U_{n} $.

Let $ V $ be a vector space over $ \mathbb{C}$ and let $ \tilde{T}:C_{c}^{\infty}\left(P_{n},V\right)\rightarrow\mathbb{C} $ be a distribution such that $ \tilde{T}$ is invariant to left translations of $ U_n $, i.e. $ \left\langle \tilde{T},\lambda\left(u\right)f\right\rangle =\left\langle \tilde{T},f\right\rangle $ for every $ u \in U_n $ and $ f \in C_{c}^{\infty}\left(P_{n},V\right) $. Then there exists a distribution $ S $ on $ C_{c}^{\infty}\left(G_{n-1},V\right) $ with compact support, such that $$ \left\langle \tilde{T},f\right\rangle =\int_{G_{n-1}}\left[\int_{U_{n}}f\left(ug\right)d\mu_{U_{n}}\left(u\right)\right]dS\left(g\right) $$

Here $ \mu_{U_{n}} $ is an Haar measure of $ U_{n} $.

I think I could prove this is $ U_n $ was an open-compact subgroup of $ P_n $, but it is neither of these. I guess the statement is not unique for $ P_n $, and that a similar statement holds for any semi-direct product.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is "S" actually "T"? $\endgroup$ – paul garrett Jul 10 '17 at 19:11
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, sorry about that $\endgroup$ – darkl Jul 10 '17 at 19:16
3
$\begingroup$

For a totally disconnected group $G$ and closed subgroup $H$, the averaging map $\alpha:C^\infty_c(G)\to C^\infty_c(H\backslash G)$ is surjective, certainly for scalar-valued functions, and I think for $V$-valued functions where $V$ is quasi-complete, locally convex, so that Gelfand-Pettis (or some equivalent kind of) vector-valued integrals work well. Here $C^\infty_c$ means compactly supported and locally constant, as usual for t.d. situations, and "distribution" means a continuous linear functional on $C^\infty_c$ (the latter with the canonical LF-space topology as strict colimit of finite-dimensional spaces).

The $H$-invariance of a distribution $u$ on $C^\infty_c(G)$ implies that $u$ factors through the averaging map to $C^\infty_c(H\backslash G)$, that is, gives a continuous linear functional on the latter.

There is no promise that that distribution on $H\backslash G$ is compactly supported, though. Do you really need or expect that? I don't think it would be true without additional hypotheses.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I don't really need the compact support, Thank you! $\endgroup$ – darkl Jul 10 '17 at 20:41
  • $\begingroup$ Do you really need any assumptions on $V$? A compactly supported, locally constant function is a combination of constant multiples of characteristic functions, i.e., lies in $\mathrm C_{\mathrm c}^\infty \otimes_{\mathbb C} V$, and for such functions integration is easy. $\endgroup$ – LSpice Jul 11 '17 at 16:32
  • $\begingroup$ @LSpice, of course you're right, for the t.d. case no assumption is needed. I reflexively say "quasi-complete (locally convex)" because of the archimedean case. :) $\endgroup$ – paul garrett Jul 11 '17 at 17:03

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.