How can a representation of SO(3) be more than 3 dimensional?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












The group SO(3) can be represented (and defined) by 3-by-3 matrices as most of us have seen many times before.



But in "Group Theory in a Nutshell for Physicists", we "construct" an 8-dimensional representation by stacking two one dimensional and two 3-dimensional representations "on top" of each other, and we get an 8-dimensional (obviously reducible) representation. But I cannot comprehend how an 8-dimensional representation would even make sense when talking about rotations in 3 dimensions. The original 3-dimensional representation would work on a 3-dimensional vector but how would an 8-dimensional matrix be able to perform any meaningful operation on such a vector? Am I missing the point?







share|cite|improve this question




















  • Where did an $8$-dimensional vector come from? You have a group consisting of $3times 3$ matrices, and it happens to have a nice action via linear maps on an $8$-dimensional vector space. It seems like you have even been given an explicit description of this action.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:22










  • Sorry, I meant to ask where the $8$-dimensional matrix came from.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:28










  • The book asks if we can construct an 8-dimensional representation of SO(3) and answers by creating one by "stacking" already established representations "on top of each other" looking like this. I don't think I understand the rest of your comment, since I don't have an 8-dimensional vector space.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:22











  • "Stacking" representations gives you what is called the direct sum -- in your case you get $8times 8$ matrices acting on $8$-dimensional vectors. The way it works is you just act on each part of the vector at once, according to that part's chosen representation.
    – Kyle Miller
    Aug 9 at 0:04














up vote
1
down vote

favorite












The group SO(3) can be represented (and defined) by 3-by-3 matrices as most of us have seen many times before.



But in "Group Theory in a Nutshell for Physicists", we "construct" an 8-dimensional representation by stacking two one dimensional and two 3-dimensional representations "on top" of each other, and we get an 8-dimensional (obviously reducible) representation. But I cannot comprehend how an 8-dimensional representation would even make sense when talking about rotations in 3 dimensions. The original 3-dimensional representation would work on a 3-dimensional vector but how would an 8-dimensional matrix be able to perform any meaningful operation on such a vector? Am I missing the point?







share|cite|improve this question




















  • Where did an $8$-dimensional vector come from? You have a group consisting of $3times 3$ matrices, and it happens to have a nice action via linear maps on an $8$-dimensional vector space. It seems like you have even been given an explicit description of this action.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:22










  • Sorry, I meant to ask where the $8$-dimensional matrix came from.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:28










  • The book asks if we can construct an 8-dimensional representation of SO(3) and answers by creating one by "stacking" already established representations "on top of each other" looking like this. I don't think I understand the rest of your comment, since I don't have an 8-dimensional vector space.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:22











  • "Stacking" representations gives you what is called the direct sum -- in your case you get $8times 8$ matrices acting on $8$-dimensional vectors. The way it works is you just act on each part of the vector at once, according to that part's chosen representation.
    – Kyle Miller
    Aug 9 at 0:04












up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











The group SO(3) can be represented (and defined) by 3-by-3 matrices as most of us have seen many times before.



But in "Group Theory in a Nutshell for Physicists", we "construct" an 8-dimensional representation by stacking two one dimensional and two 3-dimensional representations "on top" of each other, and we get an 8-dimensional (obviously reducible) representation. But I cannot comprehend how an 8-dimensional representation would even make sense when talking about rotations in 3 dimensions. The original 3-dimensional representation would work on a 3-dimensional vector but how would an 8-dimensional matrix be able to perform any meaningful operation on such a vector? Am I missing the point?







share|cite|improve this question












The group SO(3) can be represented (and defined) by 3-by-3 matrices as most of us have seen many times before.



But in "Group Theory in a Nutshell for Physicists", we "construct" an 8-dimensional representation by stacking two one dimensional and two 3-dimensional representations "on top" of each other, and we get an 8-dimensional (obviously reducible) representation. But I cannot comprehend how an 8-dimensional representation would even make sense when talking about rotations in 3 dimensions. The original 3-dimensional representation would work on a 3-dimensional vector but how would an 8-dimensional matrix be able to perform any meaningful operation on such a vector? Am I missing the point?









share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Aug 8 at 20:06









tbaek

62




62











  • Where did an $8$-dimensional vector come from? You have a group consisting of $3times 3$ matrices, and it happens to have a nice action via linear maps on an $8$-dimensional vector space. It seems like you have even been given an explicit description of this action.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:22










  • Sorry, I meant to ask where the $8$-dimensional matrix came from.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:28










  • The book asks if we can construct an 8-dimensional representation of SO(3) and answers by creating one by "stacking" already established representations "on top of each other" looking like this. I don't think I understand the rest of your comment, since I don't have an 8-dimensional vector space.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:22











  • "Stacking" representations gives you what is called the direct sum -- in your case you get $8times 8$ matrices acting on $8$-dimensional vectors. The way it works is you just act on each part of the vector at once, according to that part's chosen representation.
    – Kyle Miller
    Aug 9 at 0:04
















  • Where did an $8$-dimensional vector come from? You have a group consisting of $3times 3$ matrices, and it happens to have a nice action via linear maps on an $8$-dimensional vector space. It seems like you have even been given an explicit description of this action.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:22










  • Sorry, I meant to ask where the $8$-dimensional matrix came from.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Aug 8 at 20:28










  • The book asks if we can construct an 8-dimensional representation of SO(3) and answers by creating one by "stacking" already established representations "on top of each other" looking like this. I don't think I understand the rest of your comment, since I don't have an 8-dimensional vector space.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:22











  • "Stacking" representations gives you what is called the direct sum -- in your case you get $8times 8$ matrices acting on $8$-dimensional vectors. The way it works is you just act on each part of the vector at once, according to that part's chosen representation.
    – Kyle Miller
    Aug 9 at 0:04















Where did an $8$-dimensional vector come from? You have a group consisting of $3times 3$ matrices, and it happens to have a nice action via linear maps on an $8$-dimensional vector space. It seems like you have even been given an explicit description of this action.
– Tobias Kildetoft
Aug 8 at 20:22




Where did an $8$-dimensional vector come from? You have a group consisting of $3times 3$ matrices, and it happens to have a nice action via linear maps on an $8$-dimensional vector space. It seems like you have even been given an explicit description of this action.
– Tobias Kildetoft
Aug 8 at 20:22












Sorry, I meant to ask where the $8$-dimensional matrix came from.
– Tobias Kildetoft
Aug 8 at 20:28




Sorry, I meant to ask where the $8$-dimensional matrix came from.
– Tobias Kildetoft
Aug 8 at 20:28












The book asks if we can construct an 8-dimensional representation of SO(3) and answers by creating one by "stacking" already established representations "on top of each other" looking like this. I don't think I understand the rest of your comment, since I don't have an 8-dimensional vector space.
– tbaek
Aug 8 at 21:22





The book asks if we can construct an 8-dimensional representation of SO(3) and answers by creating one by "stacking" already established representations "on top of each other" looking like this. I don't think I understand the rest of your comment, since I don't have an 8-dimensional vector space.
– tbaek
Aug 8 at 21:22













"Stacking" representations gives you what is called the direct sum -- in your case you get $8times 8$ matrices acting on $8$-dimensional vectors. The way it works is you just act on each part of the vector at once, according to that part's chosen representation.
– Kyle Miller
Aug 9 at 0:04




"Stacking" representations gives you what is called the direct sum -- in your case you get $8times 8$ matrices acting on $8$-dimensional vectors. The way it works is you just act on each part of the vector at once, according to that part's chosen representation.
– Kyle Miller
Aug 9 at 0:04










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote













Yes, you are :-). You're looking at a very specific and rather anomalous case where a group happens to be defined in terms of linear maps on a vector space – that's not the best way to get to grips with the concept of a linear representation, since it invites you to confuse the defining representation with representations in general.



Better to start with a different example. The symmetric group $S_n$ can act linearly on all sorts of vector spaces. For instance, on the space of real-valued functions on $n$ elements, yielding an $n$-dimensional representation (which decomposes into a $1$-dimensional and an $(n-1)$-dimensional irreducible representation). Or on the space of real-valued functions on ordered pairs of $n$ elements, yielding an $n^2$-dimensional representation (which contains a copy of the $n$-dimensional representation in the previous example).



So a representation and its possible dimensions have nothing to do with any dimensions that may occur in the definition of the group, as most groups (like $S_n$) have nothing to do with vector spaces.



In the case of $SO(3)$, consider how the group acts on $3times3$ matrices, where the action of an element $Oin SO(3)$ on a matrix $A$ is defined by $O^top AO$. This is a linear action on the $9$-dimensional space of $3times3$ matrices, and thus a $9$-dimensional representation of $SO(3)$. Multiples of the identity transform among themselves and thus form a $1$-dimensional subrepresentation. Antisymmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $3$-dimensional subrepresentation. Traceless symmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $5$-dimensional subrepresentation.



This $9$-dimensional representation happens to have a clear physical interpretation in $3$-dimensional space. For instance, the moment of inertia of a body is a symmetric $3times3$ matrix, which you can decompose into a scalar part and a traceless part. When you rotate the system, these transform according to the above $1$-dimensional and $5$-dimensional subrepresentations, respectively. But representations don't need to have such interpretations; all that's required for a representation is the abstract property that the multiplication among a set of linear maps on a vector space corresponds to the group multiplication.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Thank you so much for your answer - I feel like I'm getting closer to understanding. I'm still trying to understand everything you write, so I may follow up with some questions.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:29










  • @tbaek: You're welcome. I corrected the part about the moment of inertia, which isn't traceless but rather decomposes into a scalar and a traceless part. Do feel free to ask questions about the answer.
    – joriki
    Aug 9 at 5:20







  • 1




    I just want to follow up and say, that after carefully reading your response throughout the day, I (feel like I) get it - so, thanks again!
    – tbaek
    Aug 9 at 17:16










Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);








 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2876529%2fhow-can-a-representation-of-so3-be-more-than-3-dimensional%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
4
down vote













Yes, you are :-). You're looking at a very specific and rather anomalous case where a group happens to be defined in terms of linear maps on a vector space – that's not the best way to get to grips with the concept of a linear representation, since it invites you to confuse the defining representation with representations in general.



Better to start with a different example. The symmetric group $S_n$ can act linearly on all sorts of vector spaces. For instance, on the space of real-valued functions on $n$ elements, yielding an $n$-dimensional representation (which decomposes into a $1$-dimensional and an $(n-1)$-dimensional irreducible representation). Or on the space of real-valued functions on ordered pairs of $n$ elements, yielding an $n^2$-dimensional representation (which contains a copy of the $n$-dimensional representation in the previous example).



So a representation and its possible dimensions have nothing to do with any dimensions that may occur in the definition of the group, as most groups (like $S_n$) have nothing to do with vector spaces.



In the case of $SO(3)$, consider how the group acts on $3times3$ matrices, where the action of an element $Oin SO(3)$ on a matrix $A$ is defined by $O^top AO$. This is a linear action on the $9$-dimensional space of $3times3$ matrices, and thus a $9$-dimensional representation of $SO(3)$. Multiples of the identity transform among themselves and thus form a $1$-dimensional subrepresentation. Antisymmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $3$-dimensional subrepresentation. Traceless symmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $5$-dimensional subrepresentation.



This $9$-dimensional representation happens to have a clear physical interpretation in $3$-dimensional space. For instance, the moment of inertia of a body is a symmetric $3times3$ matrix, which you can decompose into a scalar part and a traceless part. When you rotate the system, these transform according to the above $1$-dimensional and $5$-dimensional subrepresentations, respectively. But representations don't need to have such interpretations; all that's required for a representation is the abstract property that the multiplication among a set of linear maps on a vector space corresponds to the group multiplication.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Thank you so much for your answer - I feel like I'm getting closer to understanding. I'm still trying to understand everything you write, so I may follow up with some questions.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:29










  • @tbaek: You're welcome. I corrected the part about the moment of inertia, which isn't traceless but rather decomposes into a scalar and a traceless part. Do feel free to ask questions about the answer.
    – joriki
    Aug 9 at 5:20







  • 1




    I just want to follow up and say, that after carefully reading your response throughout the day, I (feel like I) get it - so, thanks again!
    – tbaek
    Aug 9 at 17:16














up vote
4
down vote













Yes, you are :-). You're looking at a very specific and rather anomalous case where a group happens to be defined in terms of linear maps on a vector space – that's not the best way to get to grips with the concept of a linear representation, since it invites you to confuse the defining representation with representations in general.



Better to start with a different example. The symmetric group $S_n$ can act linearly on all sorts of vector spaces. For instance, on the space of real-valued functions on $n$ elements, yielding an $n$-dimensional representation (which decomposes into a $1$-dimensional and an $(n-1)$-dimensional irreducible representation). Or on the space of real-valued functions on ordered pairs of $n$ elements, yielding an $n^2$-dimensional representation (which contains a copy of the $n$-dimensional representation in the previous example).



So a representation and its possible dimensions have nothing to do with any dimensions that may occur in the definition of the group, as most groups (like $S_n$) have nothing to do with vector spaces.



In the case of $SO(3)$, consider how the group acts on $3times3$ matrices, where the action of an element $Oin SO(3)$ on a matrix $A$ is defined by $O^top AO$. This is a linear action on the $9$-dimensional space of $3times3$ matrices, and thus a $9$-dimensional representation of $SO(3)$. Multiples of the identity transform among themselves and thus form a $1$-dimensional subrepresentation. Antisymmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $3$-dimensional subrepresentation. Traceless symmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $5$-dimensional subrepresentation.



This $9$-dimensional representation happens to have a clear physical interpretation in $3$-dimensional space. For instance, the moment of inertia of a body is a symmetric $3times3$ matrix, which you can decompose into a scalar part and a traceless part. When you rotate the system, these transform according to the above $1$-dimensional and $5$-dimensional subrepresentations, respectively. But representations don't need to have such interpretations; all that's required for a representation is the abstract property that the multiplication among a set of linear maps on a vector space corresponds to the group multiplication.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Thank you so much for your answer - I feel like I'm getting closer to understanding. I'm still trying to understand everything you write, so I may follow up with some questions.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:29










  • @tbaek: You're welcome. I corrected the part about the moment of inertia, which isn't traceless but rather decomposes into a scalar and a traceless part. Do feel free to ask questions about the answer.
    – joriki
    Aug 9 at 5:20







  • 1




    I just want to follow up and say, that after carefully reading your response throughout the day, I (feel like I) get it - so, thanks again!
    – tbaek
    Aug 9 at 17:16












up vote
4
down vote










up vote
4
down vote









Yes, you are :-). You're looking at a very specific and rather anomalous case where a group happens to be defined in terms of linear maps on a vector space – that's not the best way to get to grips with the concept of a linear representation, since it invites you to confuse the defining representation with representations in general.



Better to start with a different example. The symmetric group $S_n$ can act linearly on all sorts of vector spaces. For instance, on the space of real-valued functions on $n$ elements, yielding an $n$-dimensional representation (which decomposes into a $1$-dimensional and an $(n-1)$-dimensional irreducible representation). Or on the space of real-valued functions on ordered pairs of $n$ elements, yielding an $n^2$-dimensional representation (which contains a copy of the $n$-dimensional representation in the previous example).



So a representation and its possible dimensions have nothing to do with any dimensions that may occur in the definition of the group, as most groups (like $S_n$) have nothing to do with vector spaces.



In the case of $SO(3)$, consider how the group acts on $3times3$ matrices, where the action of an element $Oin SO(3)$ on a matrix $A$ is defined by $O^top AO$. This is a linear action on the $9$-dimensional space of $3times3$ matrices, and thus a $9$-dimensional representation of $SO(3)$. Multiples of the identity transform among themselves and thus form a $1$-dimensional subrepresentation. Antisymmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $3$-dimensional subrepresentation. Traceless symmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $5$-dimensional subrepresentation.



This $9$-dimensional representation happens to have a clear physical interpretation in $3$-dimensional space. For instance, the moment of inertia of a body is a symmetric $3times3$ matrix, which you can decompose into a scalar part and a traceless part. When you rotate the system, these transform according to the above $1$-dimensional and $5$-dimensional subrepresentations, respectively. But representations don't need to have such interpretations; all that's required for a representation is the abstract property that the multiplication among a set of linear maps on a vector space corresponds to the group multiplication.






share|cite|improve this answer














Yes, you are :-). You're looking at a very specific and rather anomalous case where a group happens to be defined in terms of linear maps on a vector space – that's not the best way to get to grips with the concept of a linear representation, since it invites you to confuse the defining representation with representations in general.



Better to start with a different example. The symmetric group $S_n$ can act linearly on all sorts of vector spaces. For instance, on the space of real-valued functions on $n$ elements, yielding an $n$-dimensional representation (which decomposes into a $1$-dimensional and an $(n-1)$-dimensional irreducible representation). Or on the space of real-valued functions on ordered pairs of $n$ elements, yielding an $n^2$-dimensional representation (which contains a copy of the $n$-dimensional representation in the previous example).



So a representation and its possible dimensions have nothing to do with any dimensions that may occur in the definition of the group, as most groups (like $S_n$) have nothing to do with vector spaces.



In the case of $SO(3)$, consider how the group acts on $3times3$ matrices, where the action of an element $Oin SO(3)$ on a matrix $A$ is defined by $O^top AO$. This is a linear action on the $9$-dimensional space of $3times3$ matrices, and thus a $9$-dimensional representation of $SO(3)$. Multiples of the identity transform among themselves and thus form a $1$-dimensional subrepresentation. Antisymmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $3$-dimensional subrepresentation. Traceless symmetric matrices also transform among themselves and thus form a $5$-dimensional subrepresentation.



This $9$-dimensional representation happens to have a clear physical interpretation in $3$-dimensional space. For instance, the moment of inertia of a body is a symmetric $3times3$ matrix, which you can decompose into a scalar part and a traceless part. When you rotate the system, these transform according to the above $1$-dimensional and $5$-dimensional subrepresentations, respectively. But representations don't need to have such interpretations; all that's required for a representation is the abstract property that the multiplication among a set of linear maps on a vector space corresponds to the group multiplication.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Aug 9 at 5:15

























answered Aug 8 at 20:29









joriki

165k10180328




165k10180328







  • 1




    Thank you so much for your answer - I feel like I'm getting closer to understanding. I'm still trying to understand everything you write, so I may follow up with some questions.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:29










  • @tbaek: You're welcome. I corrected the part about the moment of inertia, which isn't traceless but rather decomposes into a scalar and a traceless part. Do feel free to ask questions about the answer.
    – joriki
    Aug 9 at 5:20







  • 1




    I just want to follow up and say, that after carefully reading your response throughout the day, I (feel like I) get it - so, thanks again!
    – tbaek
    Aug 9 at 17:16












  • 1




    Thank you so much for your answer - I feel like I'm getting closer to understanding. I'm still trying to understand everything you write, so I may follow up with some questions.
    – tbaek
    Aug 8 at 21:29










  • @tbaek: You're welcome. I corrected the part about the moment of inertia, which isn't traceless but rather decomposes into a scalar and a traceless part. Do feel free to ask questions about the answer.
    – joriki
    Aug 9 at 5:20







  • 1




    I just want to follow up and say, that after carefully reading your response throughout the day, I (feel like I) get it - so, thanks again!
    – tbaek
    Aug 9 at 17:16







1




1




Thank you so much for your answer - I feel like I'm getting closer to understanding. I'm still trying to understand everything you write, so I may follow up with some questions.
– tbaek
Aug 8 at 21:29




Thank you so much for your answer - I feel like I'm getting closer to understanding. I'm still trying to understand everything you write, so I may follow up with some questions.
– tbaek
Aug 8 at 21:29












@tbaek: You're welcome. I corrected the part about the moment of inertia, which isn't traceless but rather decomposes into a scalar and a traceless part. Do feel free to ask questions about the answer.
– joriki
Aug 9 at 5:20





@tbaek: You're welcome. I corrected the part about the moment of inertia, which isn't traceless but rather decomposes into a scalar and a traceless part. Do feel free to ask questions about the answer.
– joriki
Aug 9 at 5:20





1




1




I just want to follow up and say, that after carefully reading your response throughout the day, I (feel like I) get it - so, thanks again!
– tbaek
Aug 9 at 17:16




I just want to follow up and say, that after carefully reading your response throughout the day, I (feel like I) get it - so, thanks again!
– tbaek
Aug 9 at 17:16












 

draft saved


draft discarded


























 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2876529%2fhow-can-a-representation-of-so3-be-more-than-3-dimensional%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

Mutual Information Always Non-negative

Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?