Talk:Complex representation
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Wait a minute! Are you defining a real rep as a rep over a COMPLEX vector space satisfying certain reality conditions and then claiming any rep over COMPLEX vector spaces which is self-dual isn't a complex rep????????
A complex rep is a rep over a complex vector space while a real rep is a rep over a real vector space. It doesn't matter if a complex rep is self-dual. It's still a complex rep and NOT a real rep! Since you're a physicist, take the example of a Dirac spinor. It's a self-dual complex rep of the double cover of the Lorentz group which satisfies your reality conditions. But it's still a complex rep nevertheless. Or how about the Majorana spinor? It's a real rep, and to use your matrix notation in your article on real reps, it doesn't even make sense to talk of antilinear maps over it because a real rep is NOT the same thing as its complexification!!!!!!
Phys 21:58, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Wait another minute, please. It's only a confusion of language. If one hears of a "real representation", one should have in mind that it might be a rep living on a real vector space but also a rep being defined on a complex space and having a real structure (i.e. there is an anti(!)linear mapping whose square equals the identity map). Personally, for the latter I prefer the term "complex rep of real type". --Stefan Neumeier (talk) 23:02, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Start a discussion about improving the Complex representation page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Complex representation" page.