13c. Quantum permutations
We will be interested here in the quantum permutation groups, and their relation with the Hadamard matrices. The following key definition is due to Wang [1]:
A magic unitary matrix is a square matrix over a [math]C^*[/math]-algebra,
The basic examples of such matrices come from the usual permutation groups, [math]G\subset S_N[/math]. Indeed, given such subgroup, the following matrix is magic:
The interest in these matrices comes from the following functional analytic description of the usual symmetric group, from [1]:
Consider the symmetric group [math]S_N[/math].
- The standard coordinates [math]v_{ij}\in C(S_N)[/math], coming from the embedding [math]S_N\subset O_N[/math] given by the permutation matrices, are given by [math]v_{ij}=\chi(\sigma|\sigma(j)=i)[/math].
- The matrix [math]v=(v_{ij})[/math] is magic, in the sense that its entries are orthogonal projections, summing up to [math]1[/math] on each row and each column.
- The algebra [math]C(S_N)[/math] is isomorphic to the universal commutative [math]C^*[/math]-algebra generated by the entries of a [math]N\times N[/math] magic matrix.
These results are all elementary, as follows:
(1) The canonical embedding [math]S_N\subset O_N[/math], coming from the standard permutation matrices, is given by [math]\sigma(e_j)=e_{\sigma(j)}[/math]. Thus, we have [math]\sigma=\sum_je_{\sigma(j)j}[/math], so the standard coordinates on [math]S_N\subset O_N[/math] are given by [math]v_{ij}(\sigma)=\delta_{i,\sigma(j)}[/math]. Thus, we must have, as claimed:
(2) Any characteristic function [math]\chi\in\{0,1\}[/math] being a projection in the operator algebra sense ([math]\chi^2=\chi^*=\chi[/math]), we have indeed a matrix of projections. As for the sum 1 condition on rows and columns, this is clear from the formula of the elements [math]v_{ij}[/math].
(3) Consider the universal algebra in the statement, namely:
We have a quotient map [math]A\to C(S_N)[/math], given by [math]w_{ij}\to v_{ij}[/math]. On the other hand, by using the Gelfand theorem we can write [math]A=C(X)[/math], with [math]X[/math] being a compact space, and by using the coordinates [math]w_{ij}[/math] we have [math]X\subset O_N[/math], and then [math]X\subset S_N[/math]. Thus we have as well a quotient map [math]C(S_N)\to A[/math] given by [math]v_{ij}\to w_{ij}[/math], and this gives (3). See Wang [1].
We are led in this way to the following result:
The following is a Woronowicz algebra,
As a first remark, the algebra [math]C(S_N^+)[/math] is indeed well-defined, because the magic condition forces [math]||u_{ij}||\leq1[/math], for any [math]C^*[/math]-norm. Our claim now is that we can define maps [math]\Delta,\varepsilon,S[/math] as in Definition 13.6. Consider indeed the following matrix:
As a first observation, we have [math]U_{ij}=U_{ij}^*[/math]. In fact the entries [math]U_{ij}[/math] are orthogonal projections, because we have as well:
In order to prove now that the matrix [math]U=(U_{ij})[/math] is magic, it remains to verify that the sums on the rows and columns are 1. For the rows, this can be checked as follows:
For the columns the computation is similar, as follows:
Thus the matrix [math]U=(U_{ij})[/math] is magic indeed, as claimed above, and so we can define a comultiplication map, simply by setting:
By using a similar reasoning, and similar elementary computations, we can define as well a counit map by [math]\varepsilon(u_{ij})=\delta_{ij}[/math], and an antipode by [math]S(u_{ij})=u_{ji}[/math]. Thus the Woronowicz algebra axioms from Definition 13.6 are satisfied, and this finishes the proof.
The terminology comes from the following result, also from Wang [1]:
The quantum group [math]S_N^+[/math] acts on the set [math]X=\{1,\ldots,N\}[/math], the corresponding coaction map [math]\Phi:C(X)\to C(X)\otimes C(S_N^+)[/math] being given by:
Our claim is that given a compact quantum group [math]G[/math], the formula [math]\Phi(\delta_i)=\sum_j\delta_j\otimes u_{ji}[/math] defines a morphism of algebras, which is a coaction map, leaving the trace invariant, precisely when the matrix [math]u=(u_{ij})[/math] is a magic corepresentation of [math]C(G)[/math]. Indeed, let us first determine when [math]\Phi[/math] is multiplicative. We have:
On the other hand, we have as well:
We conclude that the multiplicativity of [math]\Phi[/math] is equivalent to the following conditions:
Regarding now the unitality of [math]\Phi[/math], we have the following formula:
Thus [math]\Phi[/math] is unital when the following conditions are satisfied:
Finally, the fact that [math]\Phi[/math] is a [math]*[/math]-morphism translates into:
Summing up, in order for [math]\Phi(\delta_i)=\sum_j\delta_j\otimes u_{ji}[/math] to be a morphism of [math]C^*[/math]-algebras, the elements [math]u_{ij}[/math] must be projections, summing up to 1 on each row of [math]u[/math]. Regarding now the preservation of the trace condition, observe that we have:
Thus the trace is preserved precisely when the elements [math]u_{ij}[/math] sum up to 1 on each of the columns of [math]u[/math]. We conclude from this that [math]\Phi(\delta_i)=\sum_j\delta_j\otimes u_{ji}[/math] is a morphism of [math]C^*[/math]-algebras preserving the trace precisely when [math]u[/math] is magic, and since the coaction conditions on [math]\Phi[/math] are equivalent to the fact that [math]u[/math] must be a corepresentation, this finishes the proof of our claim. But this claim proves all the assertions in the statement.
As a quite surprising result now, also from Wang [1], we have:
We have an embedding [math]S_N\subset S_N^+[/math], given at the algebra level by:
The fact that we have indeed an embedding as above is clear. Regarding now the second assertion, we can prove this in four steps, as follows:
\underline{Case [math]N=2[/math]}. The fact that [math]S_2^+[/math] is indeed classical, and hence collapses to [math]S_2[/math], is trivial, because the [math]2\times2[/math] magic matrices are as follows, with [math]p[/math] being a projection:
\underline{Case [math]N=3[/math]}. It is enough to check that [math]u_{11},u_{22}[/math] commute. But this follows from:
Indeed, by applying the involution to this formula, we obtain from this that we have [math]u_{22}u_{11}=u_{11}u_{22}u_{11}[/math] as well, and so we get [math]u_{11}u_{22}=u_{22}u_{11}[/math], as desired.
\underline{Case [math]N=4[/math]}. Consider the following matrix, with [math]p,q[/math] being projections:
This matrix is then magic, and if we choose [math]p,q[/math] as for the algebra [math] \lt p,q \gt [/math] to be infinite dimensional, we conclude that [math]C(S_4^+)[/math] is infinite dimensional as well.
\underline{Case [math]N\geq5[/math]}. Here we can use the standard embedding [math]S_4^+\subset S_N^+[/math], obtained at the level of the corresponding magic matrices in the following way:
Indeed, with this in hand, the fact that [math]S_4^+[/math] is a non-classical, infinite compact quantum group implies that [math]S_N^+[/math] with [math]N\geq5[/math] has these two properties as well. See [1].
The above results are quite surprising, and you may wonder, okay with all this mathematics, but in practice, how to intuitively accept the fact that [math]\{1,2,3,4\}[/math] has an infinity of quantum permutations. Good point, and in answer, get to learn some quantum mechanics, say from Feynman [2] or Griffiths [3] or Weinberg [4]. You will learn many interesting things from there, and above everything, become a modest person.
General references
Banica, Teo (2024). "Invitation to Hadamard matrices". arXiv:1910.06911 [math.CO].
References
- 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 S. Wang, Quantum symmetry groups of finite spaces, Comm. Math. Phys. 195 (1998), 195--211.
- R.P. Feynman, R.B. Leighton and M. Sands, The Feynman lectures on physics III: quantum mechanics, Caltech (1966).
- D.J. Griffiths and D.F. Schroeter, Introduction to quantum mechanics, Cambridge Univ. Press (2018).
- S. Weinberg, Lectures on quantum mechanics, Cambridge Univ. Press (2012).