Representation Qit
Exercise PLAN-106
primary source nl only. Explicit question version 2 with distinct contract-change review; the predecessor question is not equivalent current gold. Core, family and split are retained. No new Lean verification is claimed for this NL view.
Assumptions and conventions
This question explicitly revises its historical contract. A Lean companion must bind the current contract hash, not the predecessor hash. This is one reserved core, not two exercises.
Question
Assess the unrestricted algebraic assertion that every complex irreducible representation of an abelian group is one-dimensional, without silently importing a finite-dimensional standing convention from the cited notes. Here representations act by complex-linear invertible maps, and algebraic irreducibility means no invariant complex-linear subspaces other than zero and the whole space. Give an explicit infinite-dimensional counterexample with an abelian group, proving that the action is a representation, the carrier really has infinite complex dimension and the action is genuinely irreducible; a reducible trivial-action example is not sufficient.
Then prove the corrected positive statement: for any abelian group G and any NONZERO FINITE-DIMENSIONAL complex representation phi:G->GL_C(V) satisfying algebraic irreducibility, dim_C V=1. You may use the correctly linear scalar Schur lemma, but state exactly where abelianness, finite positive dimension and algebraic closure enter; do not infer scalarity merely from commuting operators without those hypotheses. Explain how its scalar action defines a multiplicative character G->C^times, and conversely why any such one-dimensional action is irreducible.
Give a precise finite-dimensional real counterexample when the field is not algebraically closed, rather than saying that every rotation works. If a definition permits the zero carrier to count as irreducible, assess it separately without inventing a nonzero vector or a dimension-one conclusion. State whether finiteness/compactness of G, characteristic-zero averaging, unitarity or a topology is used by the positive proof, and keep the exterior algebraic counterexample distinct from appropriately hypothesized continuous/unitary Schur results. Identify the scalar-Schur dependency without claiming an alias with the whole plan105 question.
Hint: mathematical route
The unrestricted algebraic abelian-irrep claim fails on C(t). In nonzero finite complex dimension, commuting action operators are scalar by eigenvalue-based Schur, so an invariant line is the whole irrep; real and zero/infinite-dimensional boundaries remain explicit.
- Abelianness makes every action operator commute with the action, but without finite dimension this does not imply scalarity; the C(t)^times multiplication representation is a genuine irreducible counterexample.
- In nonzero finite-dimensional complex V, the linear operator phi(h) has an eigenvalue, and the invariant-kernel Schur argument gives phi(h)=lambda_h I for every h.
- Consequently the line through any nonzero v is G-invariant, and the nonzero scalar coefficients form a multiplicative character.
- Irreducibility forces that line to be V, so dim V=1; the zero-carrier case has dimension0 and is not hidden inside this positive theorem.
- The real C4 quarter-turn representation is irreducible of dimension2, showing a field boundary; the algebraic infinite-dimensional and continuous/unitary settings remain distinct from the stated positive theorem.
Reference solution
The unrestricted assertion is false as an algebraic theorem. Put K=C(t), the field of rational functions in an indeterminate t, G=K^times, and V=K as a COMPLEX vector space. G is abelian. Multiplication phi(g)v=gv is complex-linear, invertible with inverse multiplication by g^{-1}, and respects multiplication and the identity, so it defines a representation. The powers 1,t,t^2,... are complex-linearly independent: a finite relation among them would make a nonzero complex polynomial in the indeterminate vanish. Thus V has infinite complex dimension. If a nonzero invariant complex-linear subspace W contains w!=0, then for every v!=0, the group element g=v/w sends w to v. Hence W=V, proving actual algebraic irreducibility. This is not a reducible infinite-dimensional trivial representation.
Now assume the revised positive hypotheses, in particular 0<dim_C V<infinity. Fix h in G. Abelianness gives phi(g)phi(h)=phi(gh)=phi(hg)=phi(h)phi(g), so the LINEAR operator phi(h) commutes with every action map. Scalar Schur applies in the stated finite-dimensional complex setting. Explicitly, positive finite dimension makes det(sI-phi(h)) a polynomial of positive degree; C being algebraically closed gives a root lambda_h and a nonzero eigenvector. The linear map phi(h)-lambda_h I has a nonzero kernel, which commutation makes G-invariant. Irreducibility forces that kernel to be all of V, so phi(h)=lambda_h I. This is the eigenvalue/kernel reason for scalarity, not an averaging or simultaneous-diagonalization assertion with hidden hypotheses.
For any nonzero v, the line Cv is invariant under EVERY h, because phi(h)v=lambda_h v. Algebraic irreducibility now gives V=Cv, proving dim_C V=1. Since each phi(h) is invertible and V!=0, lambda_h!=0. Applying the representation identities to a nonzero vector yields lambda_{gh}=lambda_g lambda_h, lambda_e=1 and lambda_{g^{-1}}=lambda_g^{-1}; thus h->lambda_h is a multiplicative character into C^times. Conversely such a character acts on C by invertible scalar multiplication, respects the group laws, and is irreducible because a nonzero one-dimensional complex vector space has only zero and itself as linear subspaces. No assertion of continuity of an arbitrary algebraic character is implicit.
The real boundary can be made finite and exact. Let G=C_4 act on R^2 by powers of J=[[0,-1],[1,0]]. Then J^4=I and J is orthogonal. A proper nonzero invariant real subspace would be a line Rv, so Jv=a v for a real number a; applying J twice gives -v=a^2 v, impossible for v!=0. The real representation is therefore irreducible and two-dimensional. J commutes with the action but has no real eigenvalue and is not a real scalar. A quarter-turn, not an identity or half-turn rotation, is the needed witness. It does not contradict the complex theorem: over C the same matrix has eigenlines with eigenvalues i and -i.
If V=0 is admitted by a purely invariant-subspace definition, its unique action is vacuously irreducible by that predicate but dim V=0, not 1. The positive statement expressly requires V!=0. There is no nonzero vector, eigenvector or invariant-line argument on the zero carrier; if one's irrep convention already excludes zero, this case simply lies outside that convention.
Finiteness or compactness of G is unnecessary for the positive FINITE-DIMENSIONAL proof. It uses no group averaging, inner product, unitarity or topology and no group-order/characteristic-zero division. The same eigenvalue argument works over any algebraically closed field with a finite positive-dimensional carrier. Algebraic closure can be replaced, for this particular representation, by existence of an eigenvalue in the base field for every action map; it cannot simply be omitted uniformly. The C(t) example explains the dimension boundary: multiplication by t has no complex eigenvalue, since for each lambda in C its difference from lambda I is invertible by multiplication with 1/(t-lambda). No compact, continuous, Hilbert-space or bounded-operator structure is asserted for that exterior example. It does not refute topological/unitary Schur theorems with their own hypotheses. Plan105 supplies scalar Schur for linear endomorphisms; the extra step here is applying it to abelian GROUP ACTION operators and classifying their invariant lines. Shared source/counterexample mechanisms are dependencies, not proof of whole-question equivalence.
Assessment rubric
- Explicitly refutes the unrestricted algebraic assertion by a genuine infinite-dimensional complex irreducible action of an abelian group, proving group action/linearity, infinite dimension and irreducibility rather than assuming them. (1 weight)
- For the revised nonzero finite-dimensional complex theorem, uses abelianness to place each phi(h) in the linear commutant and justifies scalar Schur with the positive-dimensional/eigenvalue/algebraic-closure hypotheses actually present. (1 weight)
- Shows every nonzero vector spans a G-invariant line, uses irreducibility to prove dimension one, and verifies the nonzero scalars form a multiplicative character and the converse one-dimensional action is irreducible. (1 weight)
- Provides the precise real C4 quarter-turn irreducibility counterexample and separates the zero carrier, algebraic infinite-dimensional boundary and continuous/unitary variants. Does not add finite G, averaging or unitarity premises or claim a plan105 alias, a gate/resource theorem or admission. (1 weight)
Graph-grounded prerequisites
These are support/source anchors, not an automatically extracted theorem-dependency proof.
- Operator and semigroup theory (frozen curriculum anchor; see graph registry)
- Matrix analysis (frozen curriculum anchor; see graph registry)
Lean view and evidence boundary
No aligned Lean view has been admitted for this native core in this textbook checkpoint. This is not a claim that the underlying mathematics lacks a formal proof. Contributions must preserve this exact target contract and split.
Sources and provenance
- website/research/sources.json
leditzky-2025-repth-qit
Source SHA-256:9f85f45f20ed5a46931ad0dec3b94ee09748bc56e39fae29b0aefe910440b0ae· MIT metadata only - Primary source
Contract: d60a5553bc25ce2cbc7f1ec76fc69539591c8d781b6742db92c8d9c494708f1b
Item digest: 138a2d9361daa1ada4d96393e86f156aad56a880fdcbd841b919c473cd3f0670
Graph snapshot: qcb-snapshot-ffa644f0da3031a1ce754b9a
Authored support steps: 5. This is not measured graph distance or model difficulty.
Question revision lineage
{ "question_version": 2, "predecessor_key": "qcb-core-plan-106-abelian-group-complex-irreps-one-dimensional", "predecessor_item_digest": "357c7cba2b273eeb17e575a4fde6689360247a58797174513ee67e27147dfafd", "predecessor_contract_hash": "13d2d42ffb9abf52316dd44b9c632fe90ca15ebc48b2772aa05e521deacfbf34", "current_contract_hash": "d60a5553bc25ce2cbc7f1ec76fc69539591c8d781b6742db92c8d9c494708f1b", "changed_contract_fields": [ "question" ], "repair_record": "shared/repairs/plan-106-abelian-dimension-scope-question-successor.json", "repair_record_digest": "44f89e5daddf14f3dbff730edaf1440547a87bdd9a72a2e12767feca4ab03582", "review_record": "reports/textbook-v1/repairs/plan-106-abelian-dimension-scope-question-successor-review.json", "review_digest": "330ca203a3d7efc8fe8a942e1520ae4d10e5c2d705db10db4b643559b9736abc", "equivalence_to_predecessor_claimed": false, "additional_core_count": 0 }