Groups are great objects to work with as we all know. With surprisingly little structure, we can say fairly general things. However groups can be difficult to manage and so we look to representations to help simplify the matter. Group representations allow us to employ both the techniques from group theory as well as linear algebra. Fields are also great objects to work with. Perhaps it's a dumb question to ask, but why do we not study representations of fields as well? We now have two (abelian) groups to work with, which seems like it could complicate matters but on the surface it doesn't seem completely unreasonable. Is there some algebraic reason for why we shouldn't bother with representations of fields or even rings?
2026-04-05 08:34:10.1775378050
Why do we study representations of groups but not fields?
480 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in SOFT-QUESTION
- Reciprocal-totient function, in term of the totient function?
- Ordinals and cardinals in ETCS set axiomatic
- Does approximation usually exclude equality?
- Transition from theory of PDEs to applied analysis and industrial problems and models with PDEs
- Online resources for networking and creating new mathematical collaborations
- Random variables in integrals, how to analyze?
- Could anyone give an **example** that a problem that can be solved by creating a new group?
- How do you prevent being lead astray when you're working on a problem that takes months/years?
- Is it impossible to grasp Multivariable Calculus with poor prerequisite from Single variable calculus?
- A definite integral of a rational function: How can this be transformed from trivial to obvious by a change in viewpoint?
Related Questions in REPRESENTATION-THEORY
- How does $\operatorname{Ind}^G_H$ behave with respect to $\bigoplus$?
- Minimal dimension needed for linearization of group action
- How do you prove that category of representations of $G_m$ is equivalent to the category of finite dimensional graded vector spaces?
- Assuming unitarity of arbitrary representations in proof of Schur's lemma
- Are representation isomorphisms of permutation representations necessarily permutation matrices?
- idempotent in quiver theory
- Help with a definition in Serre's Linear Representations of Finite Groups
- Are there special advantages in this representation of sl2?
- Properties of symmetric and alternating characters
- Representation theory of $S_3$
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Groups are an abstraction of symmetry. A group representation is a way to realize the abstract symmetry encoded in a group by means of linear transformation, i.e., as geometric transformation of a particular nice nature of a linear space, often a finite dimensional one. With fields the situation is different. A field is not something that encodes symmetry (even though it has two groups associated with it). Moreover, to have a field representation on a linear space you need to somehow create a field from the linear space and then consider field homomorphisms $F\to Fieldification(V)$. There are two problems here. There is no natural way to turning a linear space into a field. And even if there were, then since field homomorphisms are all injective, the representation will just be an embedding of the field in the (non-existent) field-of-something-on-V.
In general, you can ask the same question about any two structures. Given structure $S_1$, why don't we consider representation of it using structure $S_2$. For this to make sense you must have a way of turning an $S_1$ structure into an $S_2$ structure by considering homomorphisms. It is unreasonable to expect this to be possible. The fact that endomorphisms in any category form a monoid and that automorphisms in any category form a group explains why you see representations of groups in various different places. But endomorphisms and automorphisms rarely form fields.