Ramified Integrals, Casselman Phenomenon, and Holomorphic Continuations of Group Representations

  • Yuri A. Neretin
Conference paper
Part of the Trends in Mathematics book series (TM)


Let G be a real semisimple Lie group, K its maximal compact subgroup, and Gc its complexification. It is known that all K-finite matrix elements on G admit holomorphic continuations to branching functions on Gc having singularities at a prescribed divisor. We propose a geometric explanation of this phenomenon.


Irreducible Representation Unitary Representation Spinor Representation Maximal Compact Subgroup Principal Series 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Casselman, W., Milicic, Dr. Asymptotic behavior of matrix coefficients of admissible representations. Duke Math. J. 49 (1982), no. 4, 869–930.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Heckman, G.I., Opdam, E.M., Root systems and hypergeometric functions. I. Compositio Math, 64 (1987), 329–352MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Neretin, Yu.A. K-finite matrix elements of irreducible Harish—Chandra modules are hypergeometric. Funct. Anal. Appl., 41 2007, 295–302.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Pham, F., Introduction l’étude topologique des singularités de Landau., Paris, Gauthier-Villars, 1967MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Vasiliev, V.A., Ramified integrals, Moscow, Independent University, 2000; Engl. transl., Kluwer, 1995Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Vilenkin N.Ya. Special functions and the theory of group representations. Amer. Math. Soc., 1968 (translated from Russian 1965 edition).Google Scholar


  1. [1]
    Akhiezer, D.N.; Gindikin, S.G. On Stein extensions of real symmetric spaces. Math. Ann. 286 (1990), no. 1–3, 1–12.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Berezin, F.A. Canonical transformations in the second quantization representation. (Russian) Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 150 1963 959–962.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Berezin F.A. The method of second quantization. Nauka Moscow, 1965; English transl.: Academic Press, 1966.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Goodman, R., Holomorphic representations of nilpotent Lie groups, J. Funct. Anal., 31 (1979), 115–137.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Goodman, R.; Wallach, N.R. Structure and unitary cocycle representations of loop groups and the group of diffeomorphisms of the circle. J. Reine Angew. Math. 347 (1984), 69–133.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Graev, M.I., Unitary representations of real semisimple Lie groups. Trans. Moscow Math. Soc, v. 7., 1958, 335–389. English transl., in Amer. Math. Soc. Translations. Series 2, Vol. 66: Thirteen papers on group theory, algebraic geometry and algebraic topology.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Kirillov, A.A. Unitary representations of nilpotent Lie groups. (Russian) Russian Math. Surveys, 17 (1962), 53–104.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Kirillov, A.A. Elements of the theory of representations. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1976.MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Krötz, B.; Stanton, R. J. Holomorphic extensions of representations. I. Automorphic functions. Ann. of Math. (2) 159 (2004), no. 2, 641–724.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Krötz, B.; Stanton, R. J. Holomorphic extensions of representations. II. Geometry and harmonic analysis. Geom. Funct. Anal. 15 (2005), no. 1, 190–245.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Litvinov, G.L. On completely reducible representations of complex and real Lie groups. Funct. Anal. Appl., v. 3 (1969), 332–334.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Litvinov, G.L. Group representations in locally convex spaces, and topological group algebras. (Russian) Trudy Sem. Vektor. Tenzor. Anal. 16 (1972), 267–349; English transl., in Selecta Math. Soviet. 7 (1988), 101–182.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Nelson, E., Analytic vectors. Ann. Math., 70 (1959), 572–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Neretin, Yu.A. On the spinor representation of O(∞, C). Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 289 (1986), no. 2, 282–285. English transl.: Soviet Math. Dokl. 34 (1987), no. 1, 71–74.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Neretin, Yu.A. Holomorphic continuations of representations of the group of diffeomorphisms of the circle. Mat. Sbornik 180 (1989), no. 5, 635–657, 720; translation in Russ. Acad. Sci. Sbornik. Math., v. 67 (1990); avallable via Scholar
  16. [16]
    Neretin, Yu.A. Categories of symmetries and infinite-dimensional groups. London Mathematical Society Monographs, 16, Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Neretin, Yu.A. A construction of finite-dimensional faithful representation of Lie algebra. Proceedings of the 22nd Winter School “Geometry and Physics” (Srni, 2002). Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) Suppl. No. 71 (2003), 159–161.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Neretin Yu.A. Lectures on Gaussian integral operators and classical groups. Avallable via Scholar
  19. [19]
    Olshanskii, G.I. Invariant cones in Lie algebras, Lie semigroups and holomorphic discrete series. Funct. Anal. Appl. 15, 275–285 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Shale, D., Stinespring, W.F., Spinor representations of infinite orthogonal groups. J. Math. Mech. 14 1965 315–322.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Birkhäuser Verlag Basel/Switzerland 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuri A. Neretin
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Math. Dept.University of ViennaViennaAustria
  2. 2.Institute for Theoretical and Experimental PhysicsMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations