The Branching Rule, Part 3
“Part 3”? Didn’t we just finish proving the branching rule? Well, yes, but there’s another part we haven’t mentioned yet. Not only does the branching rule tell us how representations of decompose when they’re restricted to
, it also tells us how representations of
decompose when they’re induced to
.
Now that we have the first statement of the branching rule down, proving the other one is fairly straightforward: it’s a consequence of Frobenius reciprocity. Indeed, the branching rule tells us that
That is, there is one copy of inside
(considered as an
-module) if
comes from
by removing an inner corner, and there are no copies otherwise.
So let’s try to calculate the multiplicity of in the induced module
:
Taking dimensions, we find
since if comes from
by removing an inner corner, then
comes from
by adding an outer corner.
We conclude that
which is the other half of the branching rule.
[…] branching rule by trying to categorify a certain combinatorial relation. So let’s take the flip side of the branching rule and decategorify it to see what it […]
Pingback by The Branching Rule, Part 4 « The Unapologetic Mathematician | February 1, 2011 |