Spherical harmonics exercises

Somasuntharam Arunasalam, Joshua Ciappara, Diana Nguyen, Suo Tan

05/01/15

Exercise 12
Begin by letting x = x1 1 . . . xnn , =

x1 1

n
,
n
x
n

and

B = {x : , Nn }.
By definition, Wn is generated as an algebra by xi and x j . This generation is achieved by
taking arbitrary finite products in these elements and then arbitrary finite linear combinations
of these products. Since such products can be arranged to have the form x using the relation
xi

xi = ij ,
xj
xj

it follows that Wn is generated over C by B that is, B is a spanning set.

It remains to be shown that B is linearly independent. For this, we use induction on n,
beginning with the case n = 1. Suppose that there is a relation
m
X
j=1

where aj , bj N. Note that there

introduce the usual lexicographical
a = a0 and b < b0 . Assume that i is
a factor xa1i from the left in (1) and

bj

cj x1j

x1j

= 0,

(0.1)

is no loss in assuming the pairs (aj , bj ) are distinct, and

(total) order on these pairs: (a, b) < (a0 , b0 ) iff a < a0 or
such that (ai , bi ) is least among the (aj , bj ). By cancelling
evaluating the operator at xb1i P1 , we obtain

m
X

a ai

cj x1j

j=1

bj
b
x1j

(xb1i ) = 0.

(0.2)

Now if bj > bi , then in the above sum the j-th term vanishes. If bj < bi , then the j-th term
involves positive powers of x1 , since aj ai 0. Indeed, the only constant term in the above
expression appears for bi = bj and aj ai = 0. Since the (aj , bj ) are distinct, this constant term
is simply a non-zero multiple of ci . So we deduce that ci = 0. Repeating the same argument on
the remaining terms, we are forced to conclude that cj = 0 for all j, completing the base case
of the induction.
Suppose now the claim is known for n 1, where n 2, and assume that
m
X

cj xj j xnj

j=1

bj
b

xnj

= 0,

(0.3)

where j , j Nn1 and aj , bj N. Again choose i so that (ai , bi ) is least, but note we can no
longer assume the (aj , bj ) are distinct, so i may not be unique. In fact, set
X
ck xk k Wn1 .
i =
k:(ak ,bk )=(ai ,bi )

Suppose there is p Pn1 with i (p) 6= 0. Now from (3) we deduce that
m
X

a ai

cj xj j xnj

bj
b
xnj

j=1

(xbni p) = 0.

If bj > bi , then the j-th term vanishes; if bj < bi , then the j-th term involves powers of xn since
aj ai 0. In fact the only terms in the above sum not involving powers of xn are at indices k
with (ak , bk ) = (ai , bi ). But this component not involving xn must itself be zero, so we get
X
ck xk k bi !(p) = bi !i (p),
0=
k:(ak ,bk )=(ai ,bi )

contrary to assumption. So actually i = 0, and by the inductive hypothesis ck = 0 for all k

with (ak , bk ) = (ai , bi ). Repeating this argument on the reduced set of pairs (aj , bj ), we conclude
cj = 0 for all j and the argument is finished.