2
$\begingroup$

$\DeclareMathOperator\SL{SL}\DeclareMathOperator\GL{GL}$Is the complete representation theory of $\SL(2,\mathbb R)$, $\GL(2,\mathbb R)$, $\SL(2,\mathbb C)$, and $\GL(2,\mathbb C)$ known, in the sense that one can explicitly describe all (nonunitary, projective) irreducible representations, the decomposition of their tensor products, and the structure of all indecomposable reducible representations?

Where would I find the current state of the art?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Are you talking only about finite-dimensional representations? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 23, 2023 at 16:19
  • $\begingroup$ @SamHopkins: The finite-dimensional case is of most importance to me. But if there are interesting differences in the infinite-dimensional case I'd be interested in these as well. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 23, 2023 at 16:21
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ The infinite dimensional representation theory is MUCH more complicated and rich. Usually one restricts to admissible representations (a class with some strong finiteness conditions which includes all irreducible unitaries) and then there's an explicit and complete classification. Without that it's messy. Representations of the Lie algebra for example is classified in terms of algebraic modules for rings of differential operators on the projective line, but in general I'm not sure in what sense they are "classified". $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 30, 2023 at 1:12
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidBen-Zvi: This would make the infinite-dimensional nonunitary case also interesting for me. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 31, 2023 at 10:13

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

Yes, this is all completely settled and for the finite dimensional case it is the basic underpinning of much of Lie theory. The irreducible finite-dimensional representations of $\operatorname{SL}(2,\mathbb{R})$ are indexed by the positive integers and can be simply described as $V_m = \operatorname{Sym}^m\mathbb{R}^2$ (no need for projective representations all of these are linear). $\operatorname{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ is pretty much identical. None of the finite dimensional representations are unitary. You should find this all in any basic textbook on Lie theory.

The general linear versions are a little more subtle (see here for example) but mostly amounts to taking a $\operatorname{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$-rep and deciding how the centre acts.

Decomposition of tensor products is again well understood. You can find information under the name Schur-Weyl duality (the 2 dimensional case is sometimes called Clebsch-Gordan theory I believe).

I'm less familiar with what happens with infinite dimensional representations but it is a little more complicated see here

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

For unitary infinite dimensional representations of $SL(2, \mathbb{R})$ and $SL(2, \mathbb{C})$, I would look at

  • A. Knapp, Representation theory of semisimple groups, 1986

  • R. Takahashi, $SL(2, \mathbb{R})$, École d'Été "Analyse harmonique", Université de Nancy I, 1980

  • S. Lang, $SL(2, \mathbb{R})$, 1985.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I was explicitly asking for the nonunitary case. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 25, 2023 at 9:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .