Bourbaki

§ 2. Linear representations of groups

1. Continuous linear representations

Let G be a topological group, E a locally convex space, U a linear representation of G in E.

Definition 1

— (i) UU is said to be separately continuous if, for every s∈Gs \in G, U(s)U(s) is a continuous endomorphism of EE, and if, for every x∈Ex \in E, the mapping s↦U(s)xs \mapsto U(s)x of GG into EE is continuous.

(ii) UU is said to be continuous if (s,x)↦U(s)x(s, x) \mapsto U(s)x is a continuous mapping of G×EG \times E into EE.

(iii) UU is said to be equicontinuous if it is continuous and if the set of endomorphisms U(s)U(s), where ss runs over GG, is equicontinuous.

Remark 1

To say that UU is separately continuous means that s↦U(s)s \mapsto U(s) is a continuous mapping of GG into the space L(E;E)\mathscr{L}(E; E) of continuous endomorphisms of EE, equipped with the topology of pointwise convergence.

Remark 2

To say that UU is continuous is equivalent to the following set of three conditions:

a) for every s∈Gs \in G, U(s)U(s) is continuous; b) there exists a neighborhood VV of ee such that U(V)U(V) is equicontinuous; c) there exists a total set DD in EE such that, for every x∈Dx \in D, the mapping s↦U(s)xs \mapsto U(s)x is continuous.

These conditions are obviously necessary. Conversely, suppose that the conditions a), b), c) are satisfied. On U(V)U(V), the topology of pointwise convergence is identical to the topology of pointwise convergence in DD (TVS, III, §3, No. 4, Prop. 5). Therefore the mapping (s,x)↦U(s)x(s, x) \mapsto U(s)x of V×EV \times E into EE is continuous (GT, X, §2, No. 1, Cor. 3 of Prop. 1). Since U(s0s)x=U(s0)(U(s)x)U(s_0s)x = U(s_0)(U(s)x) for all s0∈Gs_0 \in G, s∈Gs \in G, x∈Ex \in E, one sees that UU is continuous.

When GG is locally compact, the conditions a) and b) are equivalent to the condition: a′)a') for every compact subset KK of GG, U(K)U(K) is equicontinuous.

Remark 3

Suppose that UU is a continuous linear representation of GG in EE. For every s∈Gs \in G, let U^(s)\widehat{U}(s) be the continuous extension of U(s)U(s) to the completion E^\widehat{E} of EE. Then U^\widehat{U} is a linear representation of GG in E^\widehat{E}, satisfying conditions a) and c) of Remark 2, and also condition b) by GT, X, §2, No. 2, Prop. 4. Therefore U^\widehat{U} is a continuous linear representation of GG in E^\widehat{E}.

Remark 4

When EE is a normed space, UU is said to be isometric if ∥U(s)∥=1\|U(s)\| = 1 for every s∈Gs \in G. For this, it suffices that ∥U(s)∥≤1\|U(s)\| \leq 1 for all s∈Gs \in G, because one then has

1=∥1∥≤∥U(s)∥⋅∥U(s−1)∥, 1 = \|1\| \leq \|U(s)\| \cdot \|U(s^{-1})\|,
whence ∥U(s)∥=∥U(s−1)∥=1\|U(s)\| = \|U(s^{-1})\| = 1 for all s∈Gs \in G.

Proposition 1

— If GG is a locally compact group and EE is barreled, then every separately continuous linear representation UU of GG in EE is continuous.

For every compact subset KK of GG, U(K)U(K) is compact for the topology of pointwise convergence (Remark 1), therefore is equicontinuous (TVS, III, §4, No. 2, Th. 1); one then applies Remark 2.

Lemma 1

Let G be a locally compact group, ρ\rho a lower semi-continuous finite numerical function ⩾0\geqslant 0 on G such that ρ(st)⩽ρ(s)ρ(t)\rho(st) \leqslant \rho(s)\rho(t) for all s,t∈Gs,t \in G. Then ρ\rho is bounded above on every compact subset of G.

There exists a nonempty open subset U of G such that ρ\rho is bounded above on U (GT, IX, §5, No. 4, Th. 2). Let K be a compact subset of G. Then K is covered by a finite number of sets s1U,…,snUs_1U, \ldots, s_nU. For every x∈Ux \in U, one has ρ(six)⩽ρ(si)ρ(x)\rho(s_ix) \leqslant \rho(s_i)\rho(x), therefore ρ\rho is bounded above on the siUs_iU, hence on K.

Lemma 2

Let G be a topological group, U a linear representation of G in a normed space E, and A a dense subset of E. Assume that for every s∈Gs \in G, U(s)U(s) is continuous, and that, for every x∈Ax \in A, s↦U(s)xs \mapsto U(s)x is a continuous mapping of G into E. Then the function s↦g(s)=∥U(s)∥s \mapsto g(s) = \|U(s)\| on G is lower semi-continuous and satisfies g(st)⩽g(s)g(t)g(st) \leqslant g(s)g(t).

Let B be the unit ball of E. Then g(s)=sup⁡x∈B∩A∥U(s)x∥g(s) = \sup_{x \in B \cap A} \|U(s)x\|, and each function s↦∥U(s)x∥s \mapsto \|U(s)x\| is continuous on G, therefore gg is lower semi-continuous. On the other hand,

g(st)=∥U(s)U(t)∥⩽∥U(s)∥⋅∥U(t)∥=g(s)g(t). g(st) = \|U(s)U(t)\| \leqslant \|U(s)\| \cdot \|U(t)\| = g(s)g(t).

Proposition 2

Let G be a locally compact group, U a linear representation of G in a normed space E. Let A be a dense subset of E. Assume that for every s∈Gs \in G, U(s)U(s) is continuous and that, for every x∈Ax \in A, s↦U(s)xs \mapsto U(s)x is a continuous mapping of G into E. Then U is continuous.

For, ∥U(s)∥\|U(s)\| is bounded on every compact subset of G by Lemmas 1 and 2, and one then applies Remark 2.

2. Contragredient representation

Let U be a separately continuous linear representation of G in E. Let E' be the dual of E. The mapping s↦tU(s)s \mapsto {}^tU(s) is a linear representation in E' of the group G0G^0 opposite G; we shall say that this representation is the transpose of U. The mapping s↦tU(s−1)=tU(s)−1s \mapsto {}^tU(s^{-1}) = {}^tU(s)^{-1} is a linear representation of G in E', called the contragredient of U.

Lemma 3

Let X be a locally compact space, Y and Z topological spaces, φ\varphi a continuous mapping of X×YX \times Y into Z, and φx\varphi_x the mapping y↦φ(x,y)y \mapsto \varphi(x,y) of Y into Z. The spaces C(Y),C(Z)\mathscr{C}(Y), \mathscr{C}(Z) being equipped with the topology of compact convergence, the mapping (x,f)↦f∘φx(x,f) \mapsto f \circ \varphi_x of X×C(Z)X \times \mathscr{C}(Z) into C(Y)\mathscr{C}(Y) is continuous.

It clearly suffices to consider the case that X is compact. Let (x0,f0)∈X×C(Z)(x_0, f_0) \in X \times \mathscr{C}(Z), K a compact subset of Y, and ε>0\varepsilon > 0. Let K′=φ(X×K)K' = \varphi(X \times K). Since f0∘φf_0 \circ \varphi is uniformly continuous in X×KX \times K, there exists a neighborhood W of x0x_0 such that ∣f0(φ(x,y))−f0(φ(x0,y))∣≤ε|f_0(\varphi(x,y)) - f_0(\varphi(x_0,y))| \leq \varepsilon for x∈Wx \in W and y∈Ky \in K. On the other hand, if one takes f∈C(Z)f \in \mathscr{C}(Z) to be such that ∣f(z)−f0(z)∣≤ε|f(z) - f_0(z)| \leq \varepsilon for all z∈K′z \in K', one will have ∣f(φ(x,y))−f0(φ(x,y))∣≤ε|f(\varphi(x,y)) - f_0(\varphi(x,y))| \leq \varepsilon for x∈X,y∈Kx \in X, y \in K, and therefore ∣f(φ(x,y))−f0(φ(x0,y))∣≤2ε|f(\varphi(x,y)) - f_0(\varphi(x_0,y))| \leq 2\varepsilon for x∈W,y∈Kx \in W, y \in K. Whence the lemma.

Let us now return to the earlier notations.

Proposition 3

(i) If U is separately continuous, then tU^tU is separately continuous when E' is equipped with the weak topology σ(E′,E)\sigma(E', E). (ii) *If G is locally compact and U is continuous, then tU^tU is continuous when E' is equipped with the topology of compact convergence.

The assertion (i) is immediate. The assertion (ii) follows from Lemma 3 where one has taken X=G,Y=Z=E,φ(s,x)=U(s)xX = G, Y = Z = E, \varphi(s, x) = U(s)x.

3. Example: linear representations in spaces of continuous functions

Let G be a discrete group operating on the left on a set X. A complex function χ\chi on G×XG \times X is called a multiplier if

(1) χ(e,x)=1\chi(e, x) = 1 for all x∈X;x \in X; (2) χ(st,x)=χ(s,tx)χ(t,x)\chi(st, x) = \chi(s, tx)\chi(t, x) for all s,ts, t in G, x∈Xx \in X.

It follows that

(3) χ(t−1,tx)χ(t,x)=1\chi(t^{-1}, tx)\chi(t, x) = 1 for all t∈G,x∈X,t \in G, x \in X,

and in particular χ(t,x)≠0\chi(t, x) \neq 0 for all t∈G,x∈Xt \in G, x \in X.

For every complex function ff defined on X and every s∈Gs \in G, let γχ(s)f\gamma_\chi(s)f be the complex function on X defined by

(4) (γχ(s)f)(x)=χ(s−1,x)f(s−1x)(\gamma_\chi(s)f)(x) = \chi(s^{-1}, x)f(s^{-1}x).

Then γχ(e)f=f\gamma_\chi(e)f = f and

(γχ(s)γχ(s′)f)(x)=χ(s−1,x)(γχ(s′)f)(s−1x)=χ(s−1,x)χ(s′−1,s−1x)f(s′−1s−1x)=χ((ss′)−1,x))f((ss′)−1x)=(γχ(ss′)f)(x), \begin{align*} (\gamma_\chi(s)\gamma_\chi(s')f)(x) &= \chi(s^{-1}, x)(\gamma_\chi(s')f)(s^{-1}x) \\ &= \chi(s^{-1}, x)\chi({s'}^{-1}, s^{-1}x)f({s'}^{-1}s^{-1}x) \\ &= \chi((ss')^{-1}, x))f((ss')^{-1}x) = (\gamma_\chi(ss')f)(x), \end{align*}

thus γχ\gamma_\chi is a linear representation of G. For χ=1\chi = 1, one recovers the endomorphisms γ(s)\gamma(s) (Ch. VII, §1, No. 1, formula (3)).

Suppose now that G and X are locally compact, G operating continuously on X, and χ\chi continuous on G×XG \times X. Then C(X)C(X) and K(X)K(X) are stable for the γχ(s)\gamma_\chi(s), whence linear representations of G in C(X)C(X) and K(X)K(X) which we shall again denote γχ\gamma_\chi.

Proposition 4

The linear representations γχ\gamma_\chi of G in C(X)C(X) and K(X)K(X) are continuous.

The mapping (s,f)↦(s,γ(s)f)(s, f) \mapsto (s, \gamma(s)f) of G×C(X)G \times C(X) into G×C(X)G \times C(X) is continuous (No. 2, Lemma 3). On the other hand, the mapping (s,f)↦χ(s,⋅)f(s, f) \mapsto \chi(s, \cdot)f of G×C(X)G \times C(X) into C(X)C(X) is continuous; for, if s tends to s0s_0 in G, then χ(s,⋅)\chi(s, \cdot) tends to χ(s0,⋅)\chi(s_0, \cdot) uniformly on every compact subset of X; if, moreover, ff tends to f0f_0 in C(X)C(X), then χ(s,⋅)f\chi(s, \cdot)f tends to χ(s0,⋅)f0\chi(s_0, \cdot)f_0 uniformly on every compact subset of X, whence our assertion. Thus the representation γχ\gamma_\chi of G in C(X)C(X) is continuous.

Let us show that the representation γχ\gamma_\chi of G in K(X)K(X) is continuous. Since K(X)K(X) is the direct limit of Banach spaces, it is barreled (TVS, III, §4, No. 1, Cor. 3 of Prop. 3), thus it suffices to prove that γχ\gamma_\chi is separately continuous (No. 1, Prop. 1). Now, let H be a compact subset of X and let s0∈Gs_0 \in G. Let V be a compact neighborhood of s0s_0 in G, and let L = VH, which is compact in X. For every f∈K(X,H)f \in K(X, H), the support of γχ(s0)f\gamma_\chi(s_0)f is contained in L, and

sup⁡x∈X∣(γχ(s0)f)(x)∣≤sup⁡x∈L∣χ(s0−1,x)∣⋅sup⁡x∈X∣f(x)∣, \sup_{x \in X} |(\gamma_\chi(s_0)f)(x)| \leq \sup_{x \in L} |\chi(s_0^{-1}, x)| \cdot \sup_{x \in X} |f(x)|,
therefore f↦γχ(s0)ff \mapsto \gamma_\chi(s_0)f is a continuous linear mapping of K(X,H)K(X, H) into K(X,L)K(X, L); it follows that f↦γχ(s0)ff \mapsto \gamma_\chi(s_0)f is a continuous linear mapping of K(X)K(X) into itself (TVS, II, §4, No. 4, Prop. 5). On the other hand, the topology of K(X,L)K(X, L) is induced by that of C(X)C(X). By what has already been proved, the mapping s↦γχ(s)fs \mapsto \gamma_\chi(s)f of V into K(X,L)K(X, L) is continuous. This completes the proof that γχ\gamma_\chi is separately continuous.

Proposition 5

Suppose that each function χ(s,⋅)\chi(s, \cdot) is bounded. Then γχ\gamma_\chi leaves K(X)‾\overline{K(X)} stable, and the linear representation γχ\gamma_\chi of G in K(X)‾\overline{K(X)} is continuous.

It is clear that γχ\gamma_\chi leaves K(X)‾\overline{K(X)} stable and that each of the γχ(s)\gamma_\chi(s) is continuous in K(X)‾\overline{K(X)}. On the other hand, for every f∈K(X)f \in K(X), s↦γχ(s)fs \mapsto \gamma_\chi(s)f is a continuous mapping of G into K(X)K(X) and a fortiori into K(X)‾\overline{K(X)}. Therefore the representation γχ\gamma_\chi in K(X)‾\overline{K(X)} is continuous (No. 1, Prop. 2).

4. Example: linear representations in spaces of measures

Again let G be a locally compact group, operating continuously on the left in a locally compact space X, and let χ\chi be a continuous multiplier on G×XG \times X. The linear representation γχ\gamma_\chi of GG in K(X)\mathscr{K}(X) admits a contragredient representation in M(X)\mathscr{M}(X), which we shall again denote by γχ\gamma_\chi, and which is defined by the following formula (where μ∈M(X),f∈K(X)\mu \in \mathscr{M}(X) , f \in \mathscr{K}(X)):

⟨γχ(s)μ,f⟩=⟨μ,γχ(s−1)f⟩=⟨χ(s,⋅)⋅μ,γ(s−1)f⟩=⟨γ(s)(χ(s,⋅)⋅μ),f⟩, \langle \gamma_\chi(s)\mu, f \rangle = \langle \mu, \gamma_\chi(s^{-1})f \rangle = \langle \chi(s, \cdot) \cdot \mu, \gamma(s^{-1})f \rangle = \langle \gamma(s)(\chi(s, \cdot) \cdot \mu), f \rangle ,

whence

γχ(s)μ=γ(s)(χ(s,⋅)⋅μ)=(γ(s)χ(s,⋅))⋅(γ(s)μ). \gamma_\chi(s)\mu = \gamma(s)(\chi(s, \cdot) \cdot \mu) = (\gamma(s)\chi(s, \cdot)) \cdot (\gamma(s)\mu) .

We note that

(γ(s)χ(s,⋅))(x)=χ(s,s−1x). (\gamma(s)\chi(s, \cdot))(x) = \chi(s, s^{-1}x) .

The linear representation γχ\gamma_\chi of GG in C(X)\mathscr{C}(X) admits a contragredient representation in the space C′(X)\mathscr{C}'(X) of measures on XX with compact support, a representation which we again denote by γχ\gamma_\chi; the endomorphisms γχ(s)\gamma_\chi(s) of C′(X)\mathscr{C}'(X) are the restrictions of the endomorphisms γχ(s)\gamma_\chi(s) of M(X)\mathscr{M}(X).

Proposition 6

If one equips M(X)\mathscr{M}(X) (resp. C′(X)\mathscr{C}'(X)) with the topology of uniform convergence in the compact subsets of K(X)\mathscr{K}(X) (resp. C(X)\mathscr{C}(X)), then the linear representation γχ\gamma_\chi of GG in M(X)\mathscr{M}(X) (resp. C′(X)\mathscr{C}'(X)) is continuous.

Proposition 7

Suppose that each function χ(s,⋅)\chi(s, \cdot) is bounded. Then γχ\gamma_\chi leaves stable M1(X)\mathscr{M}^1(X) and, if M1(X)\mathscr{M}^1(X) is equipped with the topology of uniform convergence in the compact subsets of K(X)\mathscr{K}(X), then the linear representation γχ\gamma_\chi of GG in M1(X)\mathscr{M}^1(X) is continuous.* These propositions result from Props. 3, 4, 5.

5. Example: linear representations in the spaces LpL^p

Again let GG be a locally compact group, operating continuously on the left in a locally compact space XX. Let β\beta be a positive measure on XX with support XX. Let us assume that there exists a continuous function χ>0\chi > 0 on G×XG \times X such that, for every s∈Gs \in G,

γ(s)β=χ(s−1,⋅)⋅β \gamma(s)\beta = \chi(s^{-1}, \cdot) \cdot \beta

(which implies in particular that β\beta is quasi-invariant under GG). Then, χ\chi is a multiplier. For, given s,ts, t in GG, one has

γ(s)γ(t)β=γ(s)(χ(t−1,⋅)⋅β)=(γ(s)χ(t−1,⋅))⋅(γ(s)β)=(γ(s)χ(t−1,⋅))⋅χ(s−1,⋅)⋅β, \gamma(s)\gamma(t)\beta = \gamma(s)(\chi(t^{-1}, \cdot) \cdot \beta) = (\gamma(s)\chi(t^{-1}, \cdot)) \cdot (\gamma(s)\beta) = (\gamma(s)\chi(t^{-1}, \cdot)) \cdot \chi(s^{-1}, \cdot) \cdot \beta ,
γ(st)β=χ(t−1s−1,⋅)⋅β, \gamma(st)\beta = \chi(t^{-1}s^{-1}, \cdot) \cdot \beta ,

therefore

χ(t−1,s−1x)χ(s−1,x)=χ(t−1s−1,x) \chi(t^{-1}, s^{-1}x)\chi(s^{-1}, x) = \chi(t^{-1}s^{-1}, x)
locally β\beta-almost everywhere, consequently everywhere, since χ\chi is continuous and β\beta has support XX.

Let p∈[1,+∞[p \in [1, +\infty[. For every f∈LCp(X,β)f \in \mathscr{L}_C^p(X, \beta) and every s∈Gs \in G, let γχ,p(s)f\gamma_{\chi,p}(s)f be the function on XX defined by

(γχ,p(s)f)(x)=χ(s−1,x)1/pf(s−1x). (\gamma_{\chi,p}(s)f)(x) = \chi(s^{-1}, x)^{1/p} f(s^{-1}x).
One has
∫∗∣χ(s−1,x)1/pf(s−1x)∣pdβ(x)=∫∗∣f(s−1x)∣pχ(s−1,x)dβ(x) \int^* |\chi(s^{-1}, x)^{1/p} f(s^{-1}x)|^p d\beta(x) = \int^* |f(s^{-1}x)|^p \chi(s^{-1}, x) d\beta(x)
=∫∣f(x)∣pdβ(x), = \int |f(x)|^p d\beta(x),
therefore γχ,p(s)f∈LCp(X,β)\gamma_{\chi,p}(s)f \in \mathscr{L}_C^p(X, \beta). One sees that γχ,p(s)\gamma_{\chi,p}(s) is an isometric endomorphism of LCp(X,β)\mathscr{L}_C^p(X, \beta) and defines, by passage to the quotient, an isometric endomorphism of LCp(X,β)L_C^p(X, \beta), also denoted γχ,p(s)\gamma_{\chi,p}(s). On the other hand, χ1/p\chi^{1/p} is obviously a multiplier, therefore γχ,p\gamma_{\chi,p} is a linear representation of GG in LCp(X,β)L_C^p(X, \beta) by what we have seen in No. 3.

Proposition 8

The linear representation γχ,p\gamma_{\chi,p} of GG in LCp(X,β)L_C^p(X, \beta) is continuous and isometric.

Let f∈K(X)f \in \mathscr{K}(X). When ss tends to s0s_0 in GG, γχ,p(s)f\gamma_{\chi,p}(s)f tends to γχ,p(s0)f\gamma_{\chi,p}(s_0)f in K(X)\mathscr{K}(X), hence in LCp(X,β)L_C^p(X, \beta). Since the γχ,p(s)\gamma_{\chi,p}(s) are isometric, Prop. 8 is obtained by applying Remark 2 of No. 1.

For the case that χ\chi is not assumed continuous, cf. §4, Exer. 13.

Proposition 9

Suppose that each function χ(s,⋅)\chi(s, \cdot) is bounded. Then γχ\gamma_\chi leaves LCp(X,β)L_C^p(X, \beta) stable, and the linear representation γχ\gamma_\chi of GG in LCp(X,β)L_C^p(X, \beta) is continuous.

Let f∈LCp(X,β)f \in \mathscr{L}_C^p(X, \beta). Then

∫∗∣χ(s−1,x)f(s−1x)∣pdβ(x) \int^* |\chi(s^{-1}, x)f(s^{-1}x)|^p d\beta(x)
≤sup⁡x∈Xχ(s−1,x)p−1∫∗∣f(s−1x)∣pχ(s−1,x)dβ(x) \leq \sup_{x \in X} \chi(s^{-1}, x)^{p-1} \int^* |f(s^{-1}x)|^p \chi(s^{-1}, x) d\beta(x)
=sup⁡x∈Xχ(s−1,x)p−1∫∣f(x)∣pdβ(x), = \sup_{x \in X} \chi(s^{-1}, x)^{p-1} \int |f(x)|^p d\beta(x),
therefore γχ(s)f∈LCp(X,β)\gamma_\chi(s)f \in \mathscr{L}_C^p(X, \beta), and
∥γχ(s)∥≤sup⁡x∈Xχ(s−1,x)1/q, \| \gamma_\chi(s) \| \leq \sup_{x \in X} \chi(s^{-1}, x)^{1/q},
(5) where qq denotes the exponent conjugate to pp. If f∈K(X)f \in \mathscr{K}(X), then γχ(s)f\gamma_{\chi}(s)f tends to γχ(s0)f\gamma_{\chi}(s_0)f in K(X)\mathscr{K}(X), hence in LCp(X,β)\mathscr{L}_C^p(X, \beta), as ss tends to s0s_0. Therefore the representation γχ\gamma_{\chi} of GG in LCp(X,β)L_C^p(X, \beta) is continuous (No. 1, Prop. 2).

Properties analogous to those of Nos. 3, 4, 5 hold if GG operates on the right in XX.

In particular, if one regards GG as operating on itself by left or right translations, and if one takes χ=1\chi = 1, one obtains the left and right regular representations of GG in C(G)\mathscr{C}(G), K(G)\mathscr{K}(G), K‾(G)\overline{\mathscr{K}}(G), C′(G)\mathscr{C}'(G), M(G)\mathscr{M}(G), M1(G)\mathscr{M}^1(G). If one takes β\beta to be a left (resp. right) Haar measure on GG, and if one takes χ=1\chi = 1, one obtains the left (resp. right) regular representation of GG in LCp(G,β)L_C^p(G, \beta).

6. Extension of a linear representation of GG to the measures on GG

Let GG be a locally compact group, EE a locally convex space, UU a linear representation of GG in EE. Assume UU to be continuous and EE quasi-complete. Then, for every measure μ∈C′(G)\mu \in \mathscr{C}'(G), one has

∫GU(s) dμ(s)∈L(E;E) \int_G U(s)\, d\mu(s) \in \mathscr{L}(E; E)

(Ch. VI, §1, No. 7). We shall write U(μ)=∫GU(s) dμ(s)U(\mu) = \int_G U(s)\, d\mu(s). We equip C′(G)\mathscr{C}'(G) with the topology of compact convergence in C(G)\mathscr{C}(G). The mapping (μ,x)↦U(μ)x(\mu, x) \mapsto U(\mu)x of C′(G)×E\mathscr{C}'(G) \times E into EE is hypocontinuous relative to the equicontinuous subsets of C′(G)\mathscr{C}'(G) and the compact subsets of EE; in particular, the mapping μ↦U(μ)\mu \mapsto U(\mu) of C′(G)\mathscr{C}'(G) into L(E;E)\mathscr{L}(E; E) (equipped with the topology of compact convergence) is continuous (loc. cit., Prop. 16).

In order to be able to apply these results later on, we note that if XX is a locally compact space then C(X)\mathscr{C}(X), equipped with the topology of compact convergence, is complete (GT, X, §1, No. 6, Cor. 3 of Th. 2). On the other hand, K(X)\mathscr{K}(X) is barreled, therefore its dual M(X)\mathscr{M}(X), equipped with the topology of compact convergence in K(X)\mathscr{K}(X), is quasi-complete (TVS, III, §4, No. 2, Cor. 4 of Th. 1). Of course, K(X)\mathscr{K}(X) is complete for the topology deduced from its norm, therefore its dual M1(X)\mathscr{M}^1(X) is quasi-complete for the topology of compact convergence in K(X)\mathscr{K}(X) (loc. cit.).

Let us now assume that UU is a continuous linear representation of the locally compact group GG on a Banach space EE. Set g(s)=∥U(s)∥g(s) = \|U(s)\| for all s∈Gs \in G. Then, if μ\mu is a measure on GG such that gg is μ\mu-integrable, one has ∫GU(s) dμ(s)∈L(E;E)\int_G U(s)\, d\mu(s) \in \mathscr{L}(E; E) and ∥∫GU(s) dμ(s)∥≤∫g(s) d∣μ∣(s)\|\int_G U(s)\, d\mu(s)\| \leq \int g(s)\, d|\mu|(s) (Ch. VI, §1, No. 7, Remark 1). We again write U(μ)=∫GU(s) dμ(s)U(\mu) = \int_G U(s)\, d\mu(s).

7. Relations between the endomorphisms U(μ)U(\mu) and the endomorphisms U(s)U(s)

Lemma 4

Let TT be a locally compact space, aa a point of TT, MM a subset of M(T)\mathscr{M}(T), and F\mathfrak{F} a filter on MM. Assume that: (i) for every compact subset KK of TT, the numbers ∣μ∣(K)|\mu|(K), for μ∈M\mu \in M, are bounded above; (ii) lim⁡μ,F∣μ∣(K)=0\lim_{\mu,\mathfrak{F}} |\mu|(K) = 0 for every compact subset KK of T−{a}T - \{a\}. (iii) there exists a compact neighborhood VV of aa in TT such that lim⁡μ,Fμ(V)=1\lim_{\mu,\mathfrak{F}} \mu(V) = 1.

Then the filter F\mathfrak{F} converges to εa\varepsilon_a in M(T)\mathscr{M}(T) equipped with the topology of compact convergence in H(T)\mathscr{H}(T).

By the hypothesis (i), MM is an equicontinuous subset of M(T)\mathscr{M}(T) since it is vaguely bounded and H(T)\mathscr{H}(T) is barreled (TVS, III, §4, No. 2, Th. 1). It therefore suffices (GT, X, §2, No. 4, Th. 1) to prove that if f∈H(T)f \in \mathscr{H}(T), then lim⁡μ,Fμ(f)=f(a)\lim_{\mu,\mathfrak{F}} \mu(f) = f(a). Let KK be the union of VV and the support of ff; if K′K' is the closure of K−VK - V, one has

∣μ(K)−μ(V)∣=∣μ(K−V)∣≤∣μ∣(K′); |\mu(K) - \mu(V)| = |\mu(K - V)| \leq |\mu|(K');

since K′K' is compact and does not contain aa, one concludes from this that lim⁡μ,Fμ(K)=1\lim_{\mu,\mathfrak{F}} \mu(K) = 1. Let ε>0\varepsilon > 0, and let WW be an open neighborhood of aa in KK such that ∣f(t)−f(a)∣≤ε|f(t) - f(a)| \leq \varepsilon for t∈Wt \in W; one can write

μ(f)−f(a)=f(a)(μ(K)−1)+∫K(f(t)−f(a))dμ(t); \mu(f) - f(a) = f(a)(\mu(K) - 1) + \int_K (f(t) - f(a)) d\mu(t);

the integral over KK may be written as the sum of the analogous integrals over WW and K−WK - W; if C=sup⁡∣f∣C = \sup |f|, one therefore has

∣μ(f)−f(a)∣≤C∣μ(K)−1∣+ε⋅∣μ∣(K)+2C⋅∣μ∣(K−W). |\mu(f) - f(a)| \leq C|\mu(K) - 1| + \varepsilon \cdot |\mu|(K) + 2C \cdot |\mu|(K - W).

Since the first and third terms on the right side tend to 0 with respect to F\mathfrak{F}, one sees that indeed lim⁡μ,Fμ(f)=f(a)\lim_{\mu,\mathfrak{F}} \mu(f) = f(a).

Corollary 1

With hypotheses as in Lemma 4, suppose in addition that there exists a compact subset K0K_0 of TT containing the supports of all of the measures μ∈M\mu \in M. Then F\mathfrak{F} also converges to εa\varepsilon_a in C′(T)\mathscr{C}'(T) equipped with the topology of compact convergence in C(T)\mathscr{C}(T).

For, the restriction mapping of C(T)\mathscr{C}(T) into C(K0)\mathscr{C}(K_0) is continuous; therefore, if HH is a compact subset of C(T)\mathscr{C}(T), then the restrictions to K0K_0 of the functions in HH form a compact subset of C(K0)\mathscr{C}(K_0). It then suffices to apply Lemma 4 on replacing TT by K0K_0.

Corollary 2

With hypotheses as in Cor. 1, let ff be a continuous mapping of TT into a quasi-complete locally convex space EE. Then

lim⁡μ,T∫f(t) dμ(t)=f(a). \lim_{\mu,\mathfrak{T}} \int f(t)\, d\mu(t) = f(a).

This follows from Cor. 1, and Prop. 14 of Ch. VI, §1, No. 6.

Corollary 3

Let GG be a locally compact group, EE a quasi-complete locally convex space, and UU a continuous linear representation of GG in EE. Let β\beta be a positive measure on GG, aa an element of GG, and B\mathscr{B} a base for the filter of neighborhoods of aa, formed of compact neighborhoods. For every V∈BV \in \mathscr{B}, let fVf_V be a continuous function ⩾0\geqslant 0 on GG, with support contained in VV, and such that ∫fV dβ=1\int f_V\, d\beta = 1. Then, for every x∈Ex \in E,

U(a)x=lim⁡VU(fV⋅β)x, U(a)x = \lim_V U(f_V \cdot \beta)x,

the limit being taken with respect to the section filter of B\mathscr{B}.

The mapping s↦U(s)xs \mapsto U(s)x of GG into EE is continuous. By Cor. 2, U(a)x=lim⁡V∫(U(s)x)⋅fV(s) dβ(s)U(a)x = \lim_V \int (U(s)x) \cdot f_V(s)\, d\beta(s) with respect to the section filter of B\mathscr{B}, that is, U(a)x=lim⁡VU(fV⋅β)xU(a)x = \lim_V U(f_V \cdot \beta)x.

Proposition 10

Let GG be a locally compact group, EE a quasi-complete locally convex space, UU a continuous linear representation of GG in EE, and β\beta a positive measure on GG with support GG.

(i) The vectors U(f⋅β)xU(f \cdot \beta)x, where ff runs over K(G)\mathscr{K}(G) and xx runs over EE, are dense in EE.

(ii) *Let FF be a closed linear subspace of EE. If FF is stable for UU, then U(μ)(F)⊂FU(\mu)(F) \subset F for every μ∈C′(G)\mu \in \mathscr{C}'(G). Conversely, if U(f⋅β)⊂FU(f \cdot \beta) \subset F for every f∈K(G)f \in \mathscr{K}(G), then FF is stable for UU.

The first part of (ii) is immediate, since the restrictions of the U(s)U(s) to FF (s∈Gs \in G) define a continuous linear representation of GG in the quasi-complete locally convex space FF. The second part of (ii), and (i), follow from Cor. 3 of Lemma 4.

Exercises

See the exercises for § 2.

Transcribed from the printed volume. Not translated.