Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2008/ii/paper-4/19g/a/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2008 ii Paper 4 19G a Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-14
Work over the complex numbers. By Maschke's theorem, restriction to the normal subgroup is a direct sum of its isotypic components. For an irreducible -type , denote its isotypic component in by . Normality makes permute these components, by conjugating the -types. Any union of orbits spans a -invariant subspace, so irreducibility of means that all occurring components form a single orbit.
If there is only one component, restriction is isotypic, as claimed. Otherwise take one component and its stabilizer , a proper subgroup. This is an irreducible representation of : if were -invariant, the direct sum of its translates over coset representatives for would be a nonzero proper -invariant subspace of . It is direct because the translates lie in distinct isotypic components, and proper because .
The natural map from the induced representation sends to . It identifies the direct-sum coset decomposition with all isotypic components of , so is bijective and -equivariant. ConsequentlyThis proves the dichotomy directly, including the irreducibility of the representation being induced.
New to topics? Read the docs here!