Isotropy/little group of $O(n)$
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm trying to prove that the little group of $O(n)$ acting on a $k$-dimensional subspace of $mathbb{R}^n$, call it $V$, is $O(k)times O(n - k)$ due to the Grassmann manifold is isomorphic to $O(n)/(O(k)times O(n - k))$.
I tried following the next steps: for elements in the little group, call them $g_l$, $q in V$ has to be invariant, that is $g_lq = q$ and therefore:
$$g_l = begin{pmatrix}1_k & 0 \0 & A_{n - k} end{pmatrix} tag1$$
Where $1_k$ is the $ktimes k$ identity matrix and $A_{n-k}$ a $(n - k)times (n - k)$ matrix. A similar process can be seen in Isotropy group of $SO(n)$. I presume that $A_{n - k} in O(n - k)$ because we are working with orthonormal transformations.
Therefore, we conclude that the little group is $1_ktimes O(n - k)$ which is different from the deduction by the isomorphism for Grassmann manifold.
I'm doing something bad but I don't know what. Can you show me the way?
group-theory differential-geometry lie-groups vector-space-isomorphism grassmannian
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm trying to prove that the little group of $O(n)$ acting on a $k$-dimensional subspace of $mathbb{R}^n$, call it $V$, is $O(k)times O(n - k)$ due to the Grassmann manifold is isomorphic to $O(n)/(O(k)times O(n - k))$.
I tried following the next steps: for elements in the little group, call them $g_l$, $q in V$ has to be invariant, that is $g_lq = q$ and therefore:
$$g_l = begin{pmatrix}1_k & 0 \0 & A_{n - k} end{pmatrix} tag1$$
Where $1_k$ is the $ktimes k$ identity matrix and $A_{n-k}$ a $(n - k)times (n - k)$ matrix. A similar process can be seen in Isotropy group of $SO(n)$. I presume that $A_{n - k} in O(n - k)$ because we are working with orthonormal transformations.
Therefore, we conclude that the little group is $1_ktimes O(n - k)$ which is different from the deduction by the isomorphism for Grassmann manifold.
I'm doing something bad but I don't know what. Can you show me the way?
group-theory differential-geometry lie-groups vector-space-isomorphism grassmannian
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
1
First, in English, we say "subgroup" rather than "little group." So your mistake is that $1_k$ can be any orthogonal transformation preserving $q$. This is isomorphic to $O(k)$, not just the identity. (Take $q$, in particular, to be the subspace $Bbb R^ktimes{0}$.) And, of course, $A_{n-k}$ must be orthogonal, as well.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:02
First, for 'little group' I didn't mean 'subgroup' but 'isotropic' which are synonymous. And second, my mistake is quite related to what you say. Instead of thinking in whole spaces ($q = mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$), I was thinking in particular vectors ($q in mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$). So thanks for your contribution
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:08
"Isotropy subgroup" is what you mean :)
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:11
That's it. The slash between 'isotropic' and 'little' was just to put together both names. And again thanks for your contribution, it enlightened me
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:12
You're most welcome.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:15
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm trying to prove that the little group of $O(n)$ acting on a $k$-dimensional subspace of $mathbb{R}^n$, call it $V$, is $O(k)times O(n - k)$ due to the Grassmann manifold is isomorphic to $O(n)/(O(k)times O(n - k))$.
I tried following the next steps: for elements in the little group, call them $g_l$, $q in V$ has to be invariant, that is $g_lq = q$ and therefore:
$$g_l = begin{pmatrix}1_k & 0 \0 & A_{n - k} end{pmatrix} tag1$$
Where $1_k$ is the $ktimes k$ identity matrix and $A_{n-k}$ a $(n - k)times (n - k)$ matrix. A similar process can be seen in Isotropy group of $SO(n)$. I presume that $A_{n - k} in O(n - k)$ because we are working with orthonormal transformations.
Therefore, we conclude that the little group is $1_ktimes O(n - k)$ which is different from the deduction by the isomorphism for Grassmann manifold.
I'm doing something bad but I don't know what. Can you show me the way?
group-theory differential-geometry lie-groups vector-space-isomorphism grassmannian
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
I'm trying to prove that the little group of $O(n)$ acting on a $k$-dimensional subspace of $mathbb{R}^n$, call it $V$, is $O(k)times O(n - k)$ due to the Grassmann manifold is isomorphic to $O(n)/(O(k)times O(n - k))$.
I tried following the next steps: for elements in the little group, call them $g_l$, $q in V$ has to be invariant, that is $g_lq = q$ and therefore:
$$g_l = begin{pmatrix}1_k & 0 \0 & A_{n - k} end{pmatrix} tag1$$
Where $1_k$ is the $ktimes k$ identity matrix and $A_{n-k}$ a $(n - k)times (n - k)$ matrix. A similar process can be seen in Isotropy group of $SO(n)$. I presume that $A_{n - k} in O(n - k)$ because we are working with orthonormal transformations.
Therefore, we conclude that the little group is $1_ktimes O(n - k)$ which is different from the deduction by the isomorphism for Grassmann manifold.
I'm doing something bad but I don't know what. Can you show me the way?
group-theory differential-geometry lie-groups vector-space-isomorphism grassmannian
group-theory differential-geometry lie-groups vector-space-isomorphism grassmannian
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
edited Nov 16 at 18:36
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
asked Nov 16 at 15:38
Vicky
1387
1387
1
First, in English, we say "subgroup" rather than "little group." So your mistake is that $1_k$ can be any orthogonal transformation preserving $q$. This is isomorphic to $O(k)$, not just the identity. (Take $q$, in particular, to be the subspace $Bbb R^ktimes{0}$.) And, of course, $A_{n-k}$ must be orthogonal, as well.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:02
First, for 'little group' I didn't mean 'subgroup' but 'isotropic' which are synonymous. And second, my mistake is quite related to what you say. Instead of thinking in whole spaces ($q = mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$), I was thinking in particular vectors ($q in mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$). So thanks for your contribution
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:08
"Isotropy subgroup" is what you mean :)
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:11
That's it. The slash between 'isotropic' and 'little' was just to put together both names. And again thanks for your contribution, it enlightened me
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:12
You're most welcome.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:15
add a comment |
1
First, in English, we say "subgroup" rather than "little group." So your mistake is that $1_k$ can be any orthogonal transformation preserving $q$. This is isomorphic to $O(k)$, not just the identity. (Take $q$, in particular, to be the subspace $Bbb R^ktimes{0}$.) And, of course, $A_{n-k}$ must be orthogonal, as well.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:02
First, for 'little group' I didn't mean 'subgroup' but 'isotropic' which are synonymous. And second, my mistake is quite related to what you say. Instead of thinking in whole spaces ($q = mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$), I was thinking in particular vectors ($q in mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$). So thanks for your contribution
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:08
"Isotropy subgroup" is what you mean :)
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:11
That's it. The slash between 'isotropic' and 'little' was just to put together both names. And again thanks for your contribution, it enlightened me
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:12
You're most welcome.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:15
1
1
First, in English, we say "subgroup" rather than "little group." So your mistake is that $1_k$ can be any orthogonal transformation preserving $q$. This is isomorphic to $O(k)$, not just the identity. (Take $q$, in particular, to be the subspace $Bbb R^ktimes{0}$.) And, of course, $A_{n-k}$ must be orthogonal, as well.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:02
First, in English, we say "subgroup" rather than "little group." So your mistake is that $1_k$ can be any orthogonal transformation preserving $q$. This is isomorphic to $O(k)$, not just the identity. (Take $q$, in particular, to be the subspace $Bbb R^ktimes{0}$.) And, of course, $A_{n-k}$ must be orthogonal, as well.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:02
First, for 'little group' I didn't mean 'subgroup' but 'isotropic' which are synonymous. And second, my mistake is quite related to what you say. Instead of thinking in whole spaces ($q = mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$), I was thinking in particular vectors ($q in mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$). So thanks for your contribution
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:08
First, for 'little group' I didn't mean 'subgroup' but 'isotropic' which are synonymous. And second, my mistake is quite related to what you say. Instead of thinking in whole spaces ($q = mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$), I was thinking in particular vectors ($q in mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$). So thanks for your contribution
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:08
"Isotropy subgroup" is what you mean :)
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:11
"Isotropy subgroup" is what you mean :)
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:11
That's it. The slash between 'isotropic' and 'little' was just to put together both names. And again thanks for your contribution, it enlightened me
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:12
That's it. The slash between 'isotropic' and 'little' was just to put together both names. And again thanks for your contribution, it enlightened me
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:12
You're most welcome.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:15
You're most welcome.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:15
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3001280%2fisotropy-little-group-of-on%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
First, in English, we say "subgroup" rather than "little group." So your mistake is that $1_k$ can be any orthogonal transformation preserving $q$. This is isomorphic to $O(k)$, not just the identity. (Take $q$, in particular, to be the subspace $Bbb R^ktimes{0}$.) And, of course, $A_{n-k}$ must be orthogonal, as well.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:02
First, for 'little group' I didn't mean 'subgroup' but 'isotropic' which are synonymous. And second, my mistake is quite related to what you say. Instead of thinking in whole spaces ($q = mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$), I was thinking in particular vectors ($q in mathbb{R}^ktimes{0}$). So thanks for your contribution
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:08
"Isotropy subgroup" is what you mean :)
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:11
That's it. The slash between 'isotropic' and 'little' was just to put together both names. And again thanks for your contribution, it enlightened me
– Vicky
Nov 16 at 23:12
You're most welcome.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 16 at 23:15