E. Kowalski’s blog

Comments on mathematics, mostly.

The Spring menagerie

with 3 comments

I think readers can legitimately complain that not only have I not added a new post for a long time, but more schockingly, my last animal-related one goes back more than one year. So, to celebrate the recent belated aperçus of spring in Zürich and around, here are some pictures:

The first two are cheating, since they come from the Masoala Hall — but the first one illustrates the beautiful views from the very new canopy walk:

while the second is a rarely-seen lizard

Next comes a well-camouflaged bird, this one from a park in Graz

and another one from the aforementioned canopy

after which come a frog,

a snail,

and more frogs:

Hopefully more animal pictures will come before a year passes!

Written by Kowalski

May 6th, 2013 at 9:24 pm

A missing word

with 2 comments

From the blog of the rare books collection of the ETH Library, I just learnt that the word for the study and classification of grape species that I was looking for is “ampelography” (ampélographie in French).

(The relevance of this word to my daily life is that the computers on my home network are named after grapes; red grapes are reserved for desktops and white for laptops.)

Written by Kowalski

April 21st, 2013 at 6:48 pm

Another exercise with characters

with 4 comments

While thinking about something else, I noticed recently the following result, which is certainly not new:

Let G be a compact topological group [ADDITIONAL ASSUMPTION pointed out by Y. Choi: connected, Lie group], and let \rho be a finite-dimensional irreducible unitary continuous representation of G on a vector space V. Then the natural representation \pi of G on \mathrm{End}(V) decomposes as a direct sum of one-dimensional characters if and only if \rho is of dimension 1.

One direction is clear: if \rho has dimension one, then \pi is simply the trivial one-dimensional representation. For the converse, here is an argument with character theory.

As a first step, note that if \rho (of dimension d\geq 1, say) has this property, then in fact \pi decomposes as a direct sum of distinct one-dimensional characters: indeed, the multiplicity of a character \chi in \pi is the same as
n_{\chi}=\int_{G}\chi(x)\mathrm{Tr}(\pi(g))dg,
where dg is the probability Haar measure on G, and since
\mathrm{Tr}(\pi(g))=|\mathrm{Tr}(\rho(g))|^2,
we get
n_{\chi}\leq \int_{G}\mathrm{Tr}(\pi(g))dg=1
by the orthogonality relations of characters. (Algebraically, this is just an application of Schur’s lemma).

Thus if we decompose \pi into irreducible representations, we get
\pi=\bigoplus_{1\leq i\leq d^2} \chi_i,
where the \chi_i are distinct one-dimensional characters. We then know by orthogonality that
d^2=\int_{G} |\mathrm{Tr}(\pi(g))|^2 dg=\int_{G} |\mathrm{Tr}(\rho(g))|^4 dg.

Now the last-integral is bounded by
\int_{G} |\mathrm{Tr}(\rho(g))|^4 dg\leq \mathrm{Max}_{g}|\mathrm{Tr}(\rho(g))|^2 \times \int_G|\mathrm{Tr}(\rho(g))|^2dg\leq d^2,
(since |\mathrm{Tr}(\rho(g))|\leq d). Comparing, this means that there must be equality throughout in this estimate, which in turn implies that |\mathrm{Tr}(\rho(g))|=d for all g\in G. Since \rho(g) is unitary of size d, this implies that \rho(g) is scalar for all g, and since it is assumed to be irreducible, it is in fact one-dimensional.

I see two interesting points in this argument: (1) is there a purely algebraic proof of the last part? I haven’t thought very hard about this yet, but it would be nice to have one; (2) the appearance of the fourth moment of \rho is nicely reminiscent of the Larsen alternative (see Section 6.3 of my notes on representation theory, for instance…)

Written by Kowalski

March 22nd, 2013 at 10:19 am

Posted in Exercise,Mathematics

Zeros of Hermite polynomials

with 5 comments

In my paper with É. Fouvry and Ph. Michel where we find upper bounds for the number of certain sheaves on the affine line over a finite field with bounded ramification, the combinatorial part of the argument involves spherical codes and the method of Kabatjanski and Levenshtein, and turns out to depend on the rather recondite question of knowing a lower bound on the size of the largest zero x_n of the n-th Hermite polynomial H_n, which is defined for integers n\geq 1 by
H_n(x)=(-1)^n e^{x^2} \frac{d^n}{dx^n}e^{x^2}.

This is a classical orthogonal polynomial (which implies in particular that all zeros of H_n are real and simple). The standard reference for such questions seems to still be Szegö’s book, in which one can read the following rather remarkable asymptotic formula:
x_n=\sqrt{2n}-\frac{i_1}{\sqrt[3]{6}}\frac{1}{(2n)^{1/6}}+o(n^{-1/6})
where i_1=3.3721\ldots>0 is the first (real) zero of the function
\mathrm{A}(x)=\frac{\pi}{3}\sqrt{\frac{x}{3}}\Bigl\{J_{1/3}\Bigl(2\Bigl(\frac{x}{3}\Bigr)^{3/2}\Bigr)+J_{-1/3}\Bigl(2\Bigl(\frac{x}{3}\Bigr)^{3/2}\Bigr)\Bigr\}
which is a close cousin of the Airy function (see formula (6.32.8) in Szegö’s book, noting that he observes the Peano paragraphing rule, according to which section 6.32 comes before 6.4).

(Incidentally, if — like me — you tend to trust any random PDF you download to check a formula like that, you might end up with a version containing a typo: the cube root of 6 is, in some printings, replaced by a square root…)

Szegö references work of a number of people (Zernike, Hahn. Korous, Bottema, Van Veen and Spencer), and sketches a proof based on ideas of Sturm on comparison of solutions of two differential equations.

As it happens, it is better for our purposes to have explicit inequalities, and there is an elementary proof of the estimate
x_n\geq\sqrt{\frac{n-1}{2}},
which is only asymptotically weaker by a factor 2 from the previous formula. This is also explained by Szegö, and since the argument is rather cute and short, I will give a sketch of it.

Besides the fact that the zeros of H_n are real and simple, we will use the easy facts that \deg(H_n)=n, and that H_n is an even function for n even, and an odd function for n odd, and most importantly (since all other properties are rather generic!) that they satisfy the differential equation
y''-2xy'+2ny=0.

The crucial lemma is the following result of Laguerre:

Let P\in \mathbf{C}[X] be a polynomial of degree n\geq 1. Let z_0 be a simple zero of P, and let
w_0=z_0-2(n-1)\frac{P'(z_0)}{P''(z_0)}.
Then if T\subset \mathbf{C} is any line or circle passing through z_0 and w_0, either all zeros of P are in T, or both components of \mathbf{C}-T contain at least one zero of P.

Before explaining the proof of this, let’s see how it gives the desired lower bound on the largest zero x_n of H_n. We apply Laguerre’s result with P=H_n and z_0=x_n. Using the differential equation, we obtain
w_0=x_n-\frac{n-1}{x_n}.
Now consider the circle T such that the segment [w_0,z_0] is a diameter of T.

Now note that -x_n is the smallest zero of H_n (as we observed above, H_n is either odd or even). We can not have w_0<-x_n: if that were the case, the unbounded component of the complement of the circle T would not contain any zero, and neither would T contain all zeros (since -x_n\notin T), contradicting the conclusion of Laguerre's Lemma. Hence we get -x_n\leq w_0=x_n-\frac{n-1}{x_n},
and this implies
x_n\geq \sqrt{\frac{n-1}{2}},
as claimed. (Note that if n\geq 3, one deduces easily that the inequality is strict, but there is equality for n=2.)

Now for the proof of the Lemma. One defines a polynomial Q by
P=(X-z_0)Q,
so that Q has degree n-1 and has zero set Z formed of the zeros of P different from z_0 (since the latter is assumed to be simple). Using the definition, we have
Q'(z_0)=P'(z_0),\quad\quad Q''(z_0)=\frac{1}{2}P''(z_0).
We now compute the value at z_0 of the logarithmic derivative of Q, which is well-defined: we have
\frac{Q'}{Q}=\sum_{\alpha\in Z}\frac{1}{X-\alpha},
hence
\frac{Q'}{Q}(z_0)=\sum_{\alpha\in Z}\frac{1}{z_0-\alpha},
which becomes, by the above formulas and the definition of w_0, the identity
\frac{1}{z_0-w_0}=\frac{1}{n-1}\sum_{\alpha\in Z}\frac{1}{z_0-\alpha},
or equivalently
\gamma(w_0)=\frac{1}{n-1}\sum_{\alpha\in Z}{\gamma(\alpha)},
where \gamma(z)=1/(z_0-z) is a Möbius transformation.

Recalling that |Z|=n-1, this means that \gamma(w_0) is the average of the \gamma(\alpha). It is then elementary that for line L, either \gamma(Z) is contained in L, or \gamma(Z) intersects both components of the complement of L. Now apply \gamma^{-1} to this assertion: one gets that either Z is contained in \gamma^{-1}(L), or Z intersects both components of the complement of \gamma^{-1}(L). We are now done, after observing that the lines passing through \gamma(w_0) are precisely the images under \gamma of the circles and lines passing through w_0 and through z_0 (because \gamma(z_0)=\infty, and each line passes through \infty in the projective line.)

Written by Kowalski

February 20th, 2013 at 10:43 pm

Posted in Exercise,Mathematics

Am I a topologist?

without comments

Topological thinking is rooted in local issues — the soil, the plants, the weather, and the local customs. Peoples’ well-being is its objective.

Written by Kowalski

February 14th, 2013 at 8:56 pm