Let be a group with group law written multiplicatively: for any elements
, their product is
. Since
is a finite set, we can form the algebra
of functions
. As we know, this function algebra has a natural basis consisting of the elementary functions
which are selfadjoint orthogonal idempotents in . However, the function algebra
has nothing to do with the group structure of
so from the point of view of this construction the fact that
is a group and not just a set is irrelevant.
We can use the underlying group structure to define a different algebra whose elements are functions
, but whose operations differ from those of
and are defined using the group structure of
. In
, multiplication of functions not defined pointwise, but rather by convolution: we declare
Thus, the multiplication tensor of is not the three-dimensional identity matrix, but rather a two-dimensional object: the multiplication table of
Thus for any two functions
their convolution product is given by
which can equivalently be written
or
or
This is very different from the product of and
viewed as elements of
, which is
Similarly, instead of defining conjugation in using pointwise using conjugation in
, we define it using the the natural involution in
, which is taking inverses,
and extend this antilinearly,
This group-theoretic conjugation is indeed antimultiplicative with respect to convolution,
as well as involutive,
Finally, the multiplicative unit in is
, where
is the group unit, as opposed to being the constant function equal to
on every
, which is the multiplicative unit in
Let us record the above as an official definition.
Definition 12.1. The convolution algebra (aka a group algebra) of a group is the vector space
of complex-valued functions on with multiplication defined by
and conjugation defined by
In summary, and
are exactly the same as vector spaces, but they are different as algebras. In particular, the elementary functions
are a basis of
consisting of orthogonal projections, but in
they form a basis consisting of unitary elements.
Problem 12.1. Prove that if are isomorphic groups then their convolution algebras
and
are isomorphic algebras (the converse is false, bonus points if you give a counterexample). Also show that
is commutative if and only if
is abelian.
To further highlight the difference between and
, let us consider their selfadjoint elements. To say that a function
is selfadjoint as an element of
simply means that it is real-valued:
However, being selfadjoint in
means something else:
To further compare and contrast the function algebra and the convolution algebra
, let us consider their subalgebras. From Lecture 3 we know that the lattice of subalgebras of
is isomorphic to the lattice of partitions of
, which has nothing to do with the group structure on
. On the other hand, we have a subalgebra of
associated to every subgroup of
of
, defined by
.
In lecture, we also gave a characterization of unitary elements in .
Problem 12.2. Prove that is a subalgebra of
, and moreover that
is isomorphic to
This raises the question of whether subalgebras of are in bijection with subgroups of
, i.e. whether the lattice of subalgebras of
is isomorphic to the lattice of subgroups of
, which would be analogous to the situation with function algebras. This is not true in general. Consider the following element of
,
which is the average of the elementary functions. Equivalently, is the constant function
Then is selfadjoint (make sure you understand why), and also
Now, the internal sum is just
since multiplying each element by a fixed group element
just permutes the points of the group (make sure you understand why). Therefore,
and we conclude that the average of all elementary functions
is a projection in
. Now consider the subalgebra of
generated by the the multiplicative identity
and
,
.
Since are linearly independent (make sure you understand why), we have located a two-dimensional subalgebra inside
, for any group
. If
is a group of odd order, Lagrange’s theorem tells us that any subgroup
must also have odd order, and consequently the subalgebra
cannot be the algebra of functions vanishing outside some subgroup
of
, for then
would be isomorphic to
and its dimensions would be the cardinality of
, which is impossible since
cannot be even.