arXiv:1509.00493v2 [math.FA] 28 Jan 2017

LINEAR DEPENDENCY OF TRANSLATIONS AND SQUARE
INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS
PETER A. LINNELL, MICHAEL J. PULS, AND AHMED ROMAN
Abstract. Let G be a locally compact group. We examine the problem of
determining when nonzero functions in L2 (G) have linearly independent left
translations. In particular, we establish some results for the case when G
has an irreducible, square integrable, unitary representation. We apply these
results to the special cases of the affine group, the shearlet group and the
Weyl-Heisenberg group. We also investigate the case when G has an abelian,
closed subgroup of finite index.

1. Introduction
Let G be a locally compact Hausdorff group with left invariant Haar measure µ.
Denote by Lp (G) the set of complex-valued functions on G that are p-integrable with
respect to µ, where 1 < p ∈ R. As usual, identify functions in Lp (G) that differ only
on a set of µ-measure zero. We shall write k · kp to indicate the usual Lp -norm on
Lp (G). The regular representation of G on Lp (G) is given by L(g)f (x) = f (g −1 x),
where g, x ∈ G and f ∈ Lp (G). The function L(g)f is known as the left translation
of f by g (many papers use the word “translate” instead of “translation”). In [22]
Rosenblatt investigated the problem of determining when the left translations of a
nonzero function f in L2 (G) are linearly independent. In other words, when can
there be a nonzero function f ∈ L2 (G), some nonzero complex constants ck , and
distinct elements gk ∈ G, where 1 ≤ k ≤ n, k ∈ N (the positive integers) such that
(1.1)

n
X

ck L(gk )f = 0?

k=1

It was shown in the introduction of [22] that if G has a nontrivial element of finite
order, then there is a nonzero element in L2 (G) that has a linear dependency
among its left translations. Thus, when trying to find nontrivial functions that
satisfy (1.1) it is more interesting to consider groups for which all nonidentity
elements have infinite order. In the case of G = Rn it is known that every nonzero
function in L2 (Rn ) has no linear dependency among its left translations. Rosenblatt
attacked (1.1) by trying to determine if there is a relationship between the linear
independence of the translations of functions in L2 (G) and the linear independence
of an element and its images under the action of G in an irreducible representation
of G. In order to gain insights into possible connections between these concepts,
he computed examples for specific groups. The particular groups that he studied
Date: Fri Jan 27 15:57:46 EST 2017.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 43A80; Secondary: 42C99, 43A65.
Key words and phrases. affine group, Atiyah conjecture, left translations, linear independence,
shearlet group, square integrable representation, Weyl-Heisenberg group.
1

2

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN

in [22] were the Heisenberg group and the affine group. What made these groups
appealing is that they have irreducible representations that are intimately related
to a time-frequency equation. Recall that an equation of the form
(1.2)

n
X

ck exp(ibk h(t))f (ak + t) = 0,

k=1

is a time-frequency equation, where ak , bk ∈ R, f ∈ L2 (R) and h : R → R is a
nontrivial function. The case h(t) = t corresponds to the Heisenberg group and
h(t) = et corresponds to the affine group.
Now suppose that G is a group that has an irreducible representation related to
(1.2). Rosenblatt wondered if there existed a nontrivial f ∈ L2 (R) that satisfied
equation (1.2), then this f could be used to produce a nonzero F ∈ L2 (G) with a
linear dependency among its left translations. He then showed [22, Proposition 3.1]
that there exists a nonzero f ∈ L2 (R) that satisfies the following time-frequency
equation
(1.3)

i
Cf (t) = f (t − log 2) + exp(− et )f (t − log 2),
2

where C is a constant. This time-frequency equation corresponds to the affine group
A case since h(t) = et . This offers some hope that there might be a nonzero function
in L2 (A) that has a linear dependency among its left translations. However, there
is no clear principle that can be used to show the existence of such a function given
a nontrivial f that satisfies (1.3). Using the proof of the existence of f that satisfies
(1.3) as a guide, a nonzero F in L2 (A) with linearly dependent left translations was
shown to exist [22, Proposition 3.2].
Even less is known about the Heisenberg group Hn , n ∈ N. The relevant timefrequency equation, which has been intensely studied in the context of Gabor analysis, is
(1.4)

m
X

ck e2πibk ·t f (t + ak ) = 0,

k=1

where ck are nonzero constants, ak , bk ∈ Rn , and f ∈ L2 (Rn ). Linnell showed that
f = 0 is the only solution to (1.4) when the subgroup generated by (ak , bk ), where
k = 1, . . . , m, is discrete. This gave a partial answer to a conjecture posed by Heil,
Ramanathan and Topiwala on page 2790 of [11] that f = 0 is the only solution to
(1.4) when n = 1. As far as we know the conjecture is still open.
The motivation for this paper is to give a clearer picture of the link between
the linear independence of an element and its images under the action of G in an
irreducible representation of G and the linear independence of the left translations
of a function in L2 (G). In Section 2 we will prove the following:
Proposition 1.5. Let G be a locally compact group and suppose π is an irreducible,
unitary, square integrable representation of G on a Hilbert space Hπ . If there exists
a nonzero v in Hπ such that
n
X

k=1

ck π(gk )v = 0

LINEAR DEPENDENCY AND SQUARE INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS

3

for some nonzero constants ck ∈ C and gk ∈ G, then there exists a nonzero F ∈
L2 (G) that satisfies
n
X
ck L(gk )F = 0.
k=1

In particular if there exists a nonzero v in Hπ with linearly dependent translations,
then there exists a nonzero F in L2 (G) with linearly dependent translations.
In Section 3 we will use Proposition 1.5 to construct explicit examples of nontrivial functions in L2 (A), where A is the affine group, that have a linear dependency
among their left translations.
In Section 4 we investigate the case where G is a discrete group. We will see
that the problem of determining if the left translations of a nonzero function in
ℓ2 (G) forms a linearly independent set is related to the strong Atiyah conjecture.
We shall briefly review the strong Atiyah conjecture in Section 4.
After considering the discrete group case in Section 4, we shall return to studying
the linear dependency problem for groups that satisfy our original hypotheses. Let
K be a subgroup of a group G. If k ∈ K, x ∈ G, and f ∈ L2 (G), then we shall say
that
L(k)f (x) = f (k −1 x)
is a left K-translation of f . In Section 5 we shall prove
Theorem 1.6. Let G be a locally compact, σ-compact group and let K be a torsionfree discrete subgroup of G. If K satisfies the strong Atiyah conjecture, then each
nonzero function in L2 (G) has linearly independent K-translations.
In Section 6 we shall study the Weyl-Heisenberg group H̃n , a variant of the
Heisenberg group, Hn . The group H̃n is of interest to us because it has an irreducible unitary representation on L2 (Rn ), the Schrödinger representation, which is
square integrable. Furthermore, the time-frequency equation (1.4) is related to the
Schrödinger representation. Now if K is a torsion-free discrete subgroup of H̃n ,
then by Theorem 1.6 every nonzero element in L2 (H̃n ) has linearly independent
left K-translations. It will then follow from Proposition 1.5 that if the subgroup of
R2n generated by (ak , bk ), 1 ≤ k ≤ m, is discrete and the product ah · bk ∈ Q for
all h, k, then f = 0 is the only solution to (1.4), see Proposition 6.3. This gives a
new proof of a special case of [16, Proposition 1.3] and sheds new insights on the
problem.
In Section 7 we consider the problem of determining the linear independence
of the left translations of a function in L2 (S), where S is the shearlet group. By
using Proposition 1.5 we will see that this problem is related to the question of
determining the linear independence of a shearlet system of a function in L2 (R2 ),
which was recently studied in [19].
In the last section of the paper we investigate the linear independence of left
translations of functions in Lp (G) for virtually abelian groups G with no nontrivial
compact subgroups. In particular, we generalize [5, Theorem 1.2].
2. Proof of Proposition 1.5
In this section we will prove Proposition 1.5. Before we give our proof we will
give some necessary definitions. A unitary representation of G is a homomorphism
π from G into the group U (Hπ ) of unitary operators on a nonzero Hilbert space

4

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN

Hπ that is continuous with respect to the strong operator topology. This means
that π : G → U (Hπ ) satisfies π(xy) = π(x)π(y), π(x−1 ) = π(x)−1 = π(x)∗ , and
x → π(x)u is continuous from G to Hπ for each u ∈ Hπ . A closed subspace W
of Hπ is said to be invariant if π(x)W ⊆ W for all x ∈ G. If the only invariant
subspaces of Hπ are Hπ and 0, then π is said to be an irreducible representation of G.
A representation that is not irreducible is defined to be a reducible representation.
If π1 and π2 are unitary representations of G, an intertwining operator for π1 and
π2 is a bounded liner map T : Hπ1 → Hπ2 that satisfies T π1 (g) = π2 (g)T for all
g ∈ G. We will assume throughout this paper that the inner product h·, ·i on Hπ
is conjugate linear in the second component. If u, v ∈ Hπ , a matrix coefficient of π
is the function Fv,u : G → C defined by
Fv,u (x) = hv, π(x)ui.

We will indicate the Fu,u case by Fu . An irreducible representation π is said
to be square integrable if there exists a nonzero u ∈ Hπ such that Fu ∈ L2 (G).
We shall say that u ∈ Hπ is admissible if Fu ∈ L2 (G). The set of admissible
elements in Hπ will be denoted by Ad(Hπ ). A consequence of π being irreducible
is that if there is a nonzero admissible element in Hπ , then Ad(Hπ ) is dense in
Hπ . In fact, Ad(Hπ ) = Hπ if G is unimodular, in addition to Ad(Hπ ) containing a
nonzero element. By [10, Theorem 3.1] there exists a self adjoint positive operator
C : Ad(Hπ ) → Hπ such that if u ∈ Ad(Hπ ) and v ∈ Hπ , then
Z
Z
2
hv, π(x)uihv, π(x)ui dµ
|hv, π(x)ui| dµ =
G

G

= kCuk2 kvk2 ,

where k · k denotes the Hπ -norm. Thus if u ∈ Ad(Hπ ), then Fv,u ∈ L2 (G) for all
v ∈ Hπ .
We now prove Proposition 1.5. Suppose there exists a nonzero v ∈ Hπ for which
there exists a linear dependency among some of the elements π(g)v, where g ∈ G.
So there exists nonzero constants c1 , c2 , . . . , cn and elements g1 , g2 , . . . , gn from G
with π(gj ) 6= π(gk ) if j 6= k such that
n
X

(2.1)

ck π(gk )v = 0.

k=1

Let u ∈ Ad(Hπ ). Then 0 6= Fv,u ∈ L2 (G). Since π is unitary, hπ(g)v, π(x)ui =
hv, π(g −1 x)ui for all x and g in G; in other words the continuous linear map v 7→
Fv,u : H → L2 (G) intertwines π with the regular representation L. Combining this
observation with our hypothesis (2.1) yields for all x ∈ G,
n
X

ck L(gk )Fv,u (x) = 0,

k=1

that is Fv,u has linearly dependent left translations. The proof of Proposition 1.5
is now complete.
3. The Affine Group
In this section we give examples of nonzero functions in L2 (G), where G is the
affine group, that have a linear dependency among some of its left translations. Let
R denote the real numbers and let R∗ be the set R \ {0}. Recall that R is a group

LINEAR DEPENDENCY AND SQUARE INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS

5

under addition and R∗ is a group with respect to multiplication. The affine group,
also known as the ax + b group, is defined to be the semidirect product of R∗ and
R. That is,
G = R∗ ⋊ R.
Let (a, b) and (c, d) be elements of G. The group operation on G is given by
(a, b)(c, d) = (ac, b + ad). The identity element of G is (1, 0) and (a, b)−1 =
(a−1 , −a−1 b). The left Haar measure on G is dµ = dadb
a2 and the right Haar measure
.
Thus
G
is
a
nonunimodular
group
because
the right and left Haar
is dµ = dadb
|a|
2
measures do not agree. So f ∈ L (G) if and only if
Z Z
dadb
|f (a, b)|2 2 < ∞.
a
∗
R R

An irreducible unitary representation of G can be defined on L2 (R) by


x−b
π(a, b)f (x) = |a|−1/2 f
,
a

where (a, b) ∈ G and f ∈ L2 (R). Before we show that π is square integrable we
recall some facts from Fourier analysis.
Let f ∈ L1 (R) ∩ L2 (R), the Fourier transform of f is defined to be
Z
fˆ(ξ) =
f (x)e−2πiξx dx,
R

where ξ ∈ R. The Fourier transform can be extended to a unitary operator on
L2 (R). For y ∈ R we also have the following unitary operators on L2 (R),

Ty f (x) = f (x − y), Ey f (x) = e2πiyx f (x)
 
x
, (y 6= 0).
Dy f (x) = |y|−1/2 f
y
Given f, g ∈ L2 (R) the following relations are also true hf, Ty gi = hT−y f, gi, hf, Ey gi =
b
d
hE−y f, gi and hf, Dy gi = hDy−1 f, gi. Furthermore, Td
y f = E−y f and Dy f =
2
b
Dy−1 f . Observe that for (a, b) ∈ G and f ∈ L (R),


x−b
−1/2
π(a, b)f (x) = Tb Da f (x) = |a|
f
.
a

Using the above relations it can be shown that for f ∈ L2 (R),
Z Z
Z
Z
dadb
|fb(ξ)|2
|hf, Tb Da f i|2 2 = kf k22
hf, π(a, b)f i dµ =
dξ,
a
|ξ|
R R∗
G
R∗
R
2
b
see [12, Theorem 3.3.5]. Thus f ∈ L2 (R) is admissible if R∗ |f(ξ)|
|ξ| dξ < ∞. The
√
√
2
2
function f (x) = 2πxe−πx satisfies this criterion since fb(ξ) = − 2πiξe−πξ ,
which we obtained by combining [20, Proposition 2.2.5] with [20, Example 2.2.7].
Hence π is a square integrable, irreducible unitary representation of the affine group
G. We are now ready to construct a nonzero function in L2 (G) that has linearly
dependent left translations.
Let χ[0,1) be the characteristic function on the interval [0, 1). It follows from the
following refinement equation
χ[0,1) (x) = χ[0,1) (2x) + χ[0,1) (2x − 1)

6

that
(3.1)

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN



π(1, 0)χ[0,1) (x) = 2−1/2 π 2−1 , 0 χ[0,1) (x) + 2−1/2 π 2−1 , 2−1 χ[0,1) (x).

Thus χ[0,1) has a linear dependency among the π(a, b)χ[0,1) , where (a, b) ∈ G.
We now use χ[0,1) to construct a nontrivial function in L2 (G) that has linearly
dependent left translations. Let f ∈ L2 (R) be an admissible function for π and let
(a, b) ∈ G. Then the function


Z 1
x−b
|a|−1/2 f
F (a, b) = hχ[0,1) , π(a, b)f i =
dx
a
0

belongs to L2 (G). By Proposition 1.5, F (a, b) has linearly dependent left translations. More specifically,
L(1, 0)F (a, b) = 2−1/2 L(2−1 , 0)F (a, b) + 2−1/2 L(2−1 , 2−1 )F (a, b),

which translates to






Z 1/2
Z 1
Z 1
x−b
x−b
x−b
−1/2
−1/2
−1/2
dx =
|a|
dx +
|a|
dx.
f
f
f
|a|
a
a
a
0
1/2
0
Equation (3.1) above was used in the proof√of [22, Proposition 3.1] to show that
the time-frequency equation (1.3) with C = 2 has a nonzero solution. Basically,
equation (1.3) is a reinterpretation of the above refinement equation where the
representation π is replaced by an equivalent representation. See [22, Section 3] for
the details.
We now turn our attention to the subgroup K of the affine group G which
consists of all (a, b) ∈ G for which a > 0. This was the version of the affine
group considered in [22]. The left Haar measure for K is the same as the left Haar
measure for G. Up to unitary equivalence there are two irreducible unitary infinite
dimensional representations of K, see [7, Section 6.7] for the details. One of these
representations is given by
π + (a, b)f (x) = a1/2 e2πibx f (ax) = Eb Da−1 f (x),
where (a, b) ∈ K and f ∈ L2 (0, ∞). The representation π + is square integrable.
We are now ready to produce a nontrivial function in L2 (K) that has linearly
dependent left translations. From (3.1) we have
χ[0,1) = 2−1/2 D2−1 χ[0,1) + 2−1/2 T2−1 D2−1 χ[0,1) .
By taking Fourier transforms we obtain
χ
b[0,1) (ξ) = 2−1/2 D2 χ
b[0,1) (ξ) + 2−1/2 E−2−1 D2 χ
b[0,1) (ξ)

= 2−1/2 π + (2−1 , 0)b
χ[0,1) (ξ) + 2−1/2 π + (2−1 , −2−1 )b
χ[0,1) (ξ).

Hence, there is a linear dependency among the π + (a, b)b
χ[0,1) , where (a, b) ∈ K. It
follows from
e−2πiξ − 1
χ
b[0,1) (ξ) =
−2πiξ
2
that χ
b[0,1) ∈ L (0, ∞). Pick an admissible function f ∈ L2 (0, ∞) for π + . Then the
function
Z ∞
+
F (a, b) = hb
χ[0,1) , π (a, b)f i =
χ
b[0,1) (ξ)a1/2 e−2πibξ f (ξ)dξ
0

LINEAR DEPENDENCY AND SQUARE INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS

7

is a member of L2 (K). Proposition 1.5 yields the following linear dependency in
L2 (K) among the left translations of F (a, b).
F (a, b) = 2−1/2 L(2−1 , 0)F (a, b) + 2−1/2 L(2−1 , −2−1 )F (a, b).
This equation can easily be verified by using the relations
(e−πiξ − 1)(1 + e−πiξ )
ξ
=χ
b[0,1) (ξ).
χ
b[0,1) ( )(1 + e−πiξ ) =
2
−2πiξ
4. Discrete groups and the Atiyah conjecture

In this section we connect the problem of linear independence of left translations
of a function to the Atiyah conjecture. Unless otherwise stated we make the assumption that all groups in this section are discrete. For discrete groups the Haar
measure is counting measure. Let f bePa complex-valued function on a group G.
We will represent f as a formal sum
g g, where ag ∈ C and f (g) = ag .
g∈G a
P
Denote by ℓ2 (G) those formal sums for which g∈G |ag |2 < ∞, and CG, the group
ring of G over C will consist of all formal sums that satisfy ag = 0 for all but
finitely many g. The group ring CG can also be thought of as the set of all func2
tions on G with compact support
P and ℓ (G)2 is a Hilbert space with Hilbert basis
{g | g ∈ G}. If g ∈ G and f = x∈G ax x ∈ ℓ (G), then the left translation of f by
P
g is represented by the formal sum x∈G ag−1 x x since L(g)f (x) = f (g −1 x). SupP
P
pose α = g∈G ag g ∈ CG and f = g∈G bg g ∈ ℓ2 (G). We define a multiplication,
known as convolution, CG × ℓ2 (G) → ℓ2 (G) by
!
X
X X
α∗f =
ag bh gh =
agh−1 bh g.
g,h∈G

g∈G

h∈G

Sometimes we will write αf instead of α ∗ f . Left multiplication by an element of
CG is a bounded linear operator on ℓ2 (G). So CG can be considered as a subring
of B(ℓ2 (G)), the space of bounded linear operators on ℓ2 (G). We shall say that
G is torsion-free if the only element of finite order in G is the identity element of
G. The strong Atiyah conjecture for the group G is concerned with the values the
L2 -Betti numbers can take, and it implies the following conjecture, which can also
be considered an analytic version of the zero divisor conjecture.
Conjecture 4.1. Let G be a torsion-free group. If 0 6= α ∈ CG and 0 6= f ∈ ℓ2 (G),
then α ∗ f 6= 0.
The hypothesis that G is torsion-free is essential. Indeed, let 1 be the identity
element of G and let g ∈ G such that g 6= 1 and g n = 1 for some n ∈ N. Then
(1 + g + · · · + g n−1 ) ∗ (1 − g) = 0. The Atiyah conjecture is important in the
study of von Neumann dimension. For further information see [3, 14, 15] and [18,
Section 10]. In particular, the assertion of Conjecture 4.1 is known for free groups,
left-ordered groups and elementary amenable groups.
The following proposition gives the link between zero divisors and the linear
independence of left translations of a function.
Proposition 4.2. Let G be a discrete group and let f ∈ ℓ2 (G). Then f has linearly
independent left translations if and only if α ∗ f 6= 0 for all nonzero α ∈ CG.

8

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN

P
Proof. Let g ∈ G and let f = x∈G ax x ∈ ℓ2 (G). Then
X
X
g∗f =
ax gx =
ag−1 x x = L(g)f.
x∈G

x∈G

Consequently, if g1 , . . . , gn ∈ G are distinct and c1 , . . . , cn are constants, then
!
n
n
n
X
X
X
ck L(gk )f =
ck g k ∗ f =
ck gk ∗ f.
k=1

The proposition now follows

k=1
Pn
since k=1 ck gk

k=1

∈ CG.



As we saw in Section 3 there are nontrivial, square integrable functions on the
affine group that have a linear dependency among their left translations. Since all
nonidentity elements of the affine group have infinite order, it seems reasonable by
taking a discrete subgroup D of the affine group, such as 1 ⋊ Z, we might be able
to construct a nontrivial function in ℓ2 (D) that has a linear dependency among
its left translations. It would then be an immediate consequence of Proposition
4.2 that Conjecture 4.1 is false. However, for discrete subgroups D of the affine
group it is not true that there exists a nonzero function in ℓ2 (D) with a linear
dependency among its left translations. Indeed, the affine group is a solvable Lie
group, and all discrete subgroups of solvable Lie groups are polycyclic. By [14,
Theorem 2] Conjecture 4.1 is true for torsion-free elementary amenable groups, a
class of groups that contain all torsion-free polycyclic groups.
5. Proof of Theorem 1.6
In this section we prove Theorem 1.6. Recall that our standing assumptions on
the group G is that it is locally compact, Hausdorff with left invariant Haar measure
µ. Let
Png1 , . . . , gn be elements of G and let c1 , . . . , cn ∈ C be some constants. Set
θ = k=1 ck L(gk ). So θ ∈ B(L2 (G)), the set of bounded linear operators on L2 (G).
Define
X
CG = {
ag L(g) | ag = 0 for all but finitely many g ∈ G}.
g∈G

Note that there exists a nonzero f ∈ L2 (G) with linearly dependent left translations
if and only if there exists a nonzero θ ∈ CG with θf = 0.
For the rest of this section H will denote a discrete subgroup of G. We will also
assume that G is σ-compact in addition to our standing assumptions on G. The
subgroup H acts on G by left multiplication. By [1, Proposition B.2.4] there exists
a Borel fundamental domain for this action of H on G. More precisely, there exists
a Borel subset B of G such that hB ∩ B = ∅ for all h ∈ H \ 1 and G = HB (thus B
is a system of right coset representatives of H in G which is also a Borel subset). If
X is a Borel subset of G, then we will identify L2 (X) with the subspace of L2 (G)
consisting of all functions on G whose support is contained in X.
Let {qi | i ∈ I} be a Hilbert basis for L2 (B). We claim that S := {L(h)qi |
h ∈ H, i ∈ I} is a Hilbert basis for L2 (G). First we show that S is orthonormal.
Write hqi for L(h)qi . If h 6= k, then hhqi , kqj i = 0, because the supports of hqi
and hqj are contained in hB and kB respectively, which are disjoint subsets. On
the other hand if h = k, then hhqi , hqj i = hqi , qj i, because the Haar measure is
left invariant. This proves that S is orthonormal. Finally we show that the closure
of the linear span S of S is L2 (G). Denote byPχhB the characteristic function on
hB. If f ∈ L2 (G), then we may write f = h∈H fh , where fh = χhB f (so fh

LINEAR DEPENDENCY AND SQUARE INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS

9

has support contained in hB). Thus it will be sufficient to show that L2 (hB) ⊆ S.
Since S is invariant under H, it will be sufficient to show that L2 (B) ⊆ S, which is
obvious because the qi form a Hilbert basis for L2 (B).
For i ∈ I, let Si = {L(h)q
i | h ∈ H} and let
L
L S i denote the closure of the linear
span of Si . Now L2 (G) =
S
(where
indicates the Hilbert direct sum).
i∈I i
2
The spaces S i are isometric to ℓ (H). Indeed, define a map Ti from the Hilbert
basis Si of S i to the Hilbert basis H of ℓ2 (H) via L(h)qi 7→ h. Extend Ti linearly
to obtain an isometry Ti : S i → ℓ2 (H). Moreover, the isometry Ti intertwines the
natural left actions of H on S i and ℓ2 (H). Also let πi denote the projection of
L2 (G) onto S i . Then πi also intertwines the natural left actions of H on L2 (G)
and S i . Now suppose that there exists a nonzero f ∈ L2 (G) and a nonzero θ ∈ CH
that satisfies θf = 0. Then k := Ti πi f 6= 0 for some i, and θ ∗ k = θk = 0 because
Ti πi commutes with CH. Furthermore, k ∈ l2 (H). We can summarize the above
as follows:
Proposition 5.1. Let H be a discrete subgroup of the σ-compact locally compact
group G and let θ ∈ CH. If θf = 0 for some nonzero f ∈ L2 (G), then θ ∗ k = 0 for
some nonzero k ∈ ℓ2 (H).
Now let H be a torsion-free group which satisfies the strong Atiyah conjecture,
e.g. a torsion-free elementary amenable group. Then for 0 6= θ ∈ CH, we know that
θ ∗ k 6= 0 for all non-zero k ∈ ℓ2 (H). It follows from Proposition 5.1 that θf 6= 0 for
all nonzero f ∈ L2 (G), in other words, any nonzero element of L2 (G) has linearly
independent H-translations. The proof of Theorem 1.6 is now complete.
In a similar fashion, we can prove
Theorem 5.2. Let G be a locally compact σ-compact group and let H be an
amenable discrete subgroup of G. If α is a non-zerodivisor in CH, then α ∗ f 6= 0
for all nonzero f ∈ L2 (G).
Proof. Since αβ 6= 0 for all nonzero β ∈ CH, it follows that αβ 6= 0 for all nonzero
β ∈ ℓ2 (H) by [6, Theorem] (or use [18, Theorem 6.37]). The result now follows
from Proposition 5.1.

We saw in Section 3 that for the affine group A there exist nonzero f in L2 (A)
with linearly dependent left translations. However, Z can be identified with the
discrete subgroup 1 ⋊ Z of A. A direct consequence of Theorem 1.6 is
Corollary 5.3. Let A be the affine group. Then every nonzero f in L2 (A) has
linearly independent left Z-translations.
As noted in Section 4, if H is a discrete group, we may regard CH as a subalgebra
of B(ℓ2 (H)). Recall that the reduced group C ∗ -algebra of H, denoted C*r (H), is the
operator norm closure of CH in B(ℓ2 (H)), and the group von Neumann algebra of
H, denoted N (H), is the weak closure of CH in B(ℓ2 (H)). We can also identify the
norm and weak closures of CH in B(L2 (G)) with C*r (H) and N (H) respectively.
Though this is not needed in the sequel, we hope it maybe useful to record this.
For θ ∈ B(L2 (G)) or B(ℓ2 (H)), let kθk or kθk′ denote the corresponding operator
norms respectively. We retain the notation used in the proof of Proposition 5.1.
Observe that we have L
a natural isomorphism
B(S i ) → B(ℓ2 (H)) induced by Ti .
L
2
Furthermore L (G) =
indicates the Hilbert direct sum), and
i∈I S i (where
this a decomposition as left CH-modules. We will need the following:

10

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN

Lemma 5.4. Let θ ∈ CH. Then kθk = kθk′
Proof. Note that θ can bePconsidered as an operator on L2 (G) or ℓ2 (H). If u ∈
L2 (G), we may write u = i∈I ui with ui ∈ S i , so
X
kθk =
sup
kθuk2 =
sup
kθ
ui k2
u∈L2 (G), kuk2 =1

u∈L2 (G), kuk2 =1

≤

sup
u∈L2 (G), kuk2 =1

i∈I

sX
i∈I

kθk′ 2 kui k22 = kθk′ .

Fix ι ∈ I. Then

kθk′ =

sup
u∈S ι , kuk2 =1

kθuk2 ≤

sup
u∈L2 (G), kuk2 =1

kθuk2 ≤ kθk.

Therefore, kθk = kθk′ .



Denote by O(H) the operator norm closure, and W(H) the weak closure of
CH in B(L2 (G)). The space W(H) is a von Neumann algebra and by the double
commutant theorem is equal to the strong closure of CH in B(L2 (G)). Note that
O(H) ⊆ W(H) and C*r (H) ⊆ N (H). We now relate these various algebras:
Proposition 5.5. There is a ∗-isomorphism α : W(H) → N (H). Moreover, α
preserves the operator norm and maps O(H) onto C*r (H).
P
Proof. Recall that for u ∈ L2 (G), we can uniquely write u = i∈I ui with ui ∈ S i .
Let θ ∈ W(H). Then there exists a net (θi ) in CH which converges strongly to θ.
Therefore for every u ∈ L2 (G), the net (θi u) is convergent in L2 (G), consequently
the net (θi uj ) is convergent for every j, in particular (θi f ) is a Cauchy net in ℓ2 (H)
for every f ∈ ℓ2 (H). We deduce that (θi ) is a Cauchy net in B(ℓ2 (H)) (in the strong
operator topology) and hence converges to an operator θ′ ∈ N (H). We note that
θ′ doesn’t depend on the choice of the net (θi ) and therefore we have a well-defined
map α : W(H) → N (H), where α(θ) = θ′ and α is the identity on CH.
We now construct the inverse to α by reversing the above steps. Let φ ∈ N (H).
By the Kaplansky density theorem there exists a net (θi ) in CH which converges
strongly to φ and kθi k′ bounded. Thus kθi k is bounded because kθi k = kθi k′
2
for each
P i by Lemma 5.4. Now let u ∈ L2 (G). If J is a finite subset of I, set
vJ = j∈J uj . Then (θi vj ) converges in L (G) for every J . Since kθi k is bounded,
it follows that (θi u) is convergent in L2 (G) and we conclude that (θi ) converges
strongly to an operator φ̃ ∈ B(L2 (G)). It follows that we have a well-defined map
φ → φ̃ : N (H) → W(H), which is the inverse to α.
It is easily checked that α is a ∗-isomorphism and therefore is an isomorphism of
C ∗ -algebras, in particular it preserves the operator norm. We deduce that α maps
O(H) onto C*r (H).

Remark 5.6. Proposition 5.5 can be used to give a different proof of Proposition
5.1; for details, see [21, Chapter 2.5].
6. The Weyl-Heisenberg group
In this section we use techniques developed in this paper to determine when
f = 0 is the only solution to the time-frequency equation (1.4). The relevant group

LINEAR DEPENDENCY AND SQUARE INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS

11

here is the Weyl-Heisenberg group since it has an irreducible representation that is
square integrable.
Let n ∈ N. The Heisenberg group Hn is the set of (n + 2) × (n + 2) matrices of
the form


1 a z
0 1 n b 
0 0 1
where a is a 1 × n matrix, b is a n × 1 matrix, the zero in the (2, 1) position is the
n × 1 zero matrix, the zero in the (3, 2) position is the 1 × n zero matrix, and the
1n in the (2, 2) position is the n × n identity matrix. Another way to represent Hn
cn × Rn . Here we view Rn as n × 1 column matrices and
is as the product R × R
n
c
R as 1 × n row matrices. For (z1 , a1 , b1 ), (z2 , a2 , b2 ) ∈ Hn the group law becomes
(z1 , a1 , b1 )(z2 , a2 , b2 ) = (z1 +z2 +a1 ·b2 , a1 +a2 , b1 +b2 ). Thus the identity element in
Hn is (0, 0, 0) and (z, a, b)−1 = (a · b − z, −a, −b). For f ∈ L2 (Rn ) and (z, a, b) ∈ Hn
define
π(z, a, b)f (x) = e2πiz e−2πia·b e2πia·x f (x − b).

It turns out that π is a representation of Hn on L2 (Rn ). Indeed, let (z1 , a1 , b1 ),
(z2 , a2 , b2 ) ∈ Hn . Then


π(z1 , a1 , b1 ) π(z2 , a2 , b2 )f (x) = π(z1 , a1 , b1 ) e2πiz2 e−2πia2 ·b2 e2πia2 ·x f (x − b2 )
= e2πiz1 e2πiz2 e−2πia1 ·b1 e−2πia2 ·b2 e2πia1 ·x e2πia2 ·(x−b1 ) f (x − b2 − b1 )
= e2πi(z1 +z2 ) e−2πi(a1 ·b1 +a2 ·b2 ) e−2πia2 ·b1 e2πia2 ·x f (x − (b1 + b2 ))

= e2πi(z1 +z2 +a1 ·b2 ) e−2πi(a1 +a2 )·(b1 +b2 ) e2πi(a1 +a2 )·x f (x − (b1 + b2 ))

= π(z1 , a1 , b1 )π(z2 , a2 , b2 ) f (x).

Let Z = h(2π, 0, 0)i, the subgroup of Hn generated by (2π, 0, 0). Set H̃n = Hn /Z.
The group H̃n is known as the Weyl-Heisenberg group. Clearly Z = ker π and so π
induces a representation π̃ on H̃n . Observe that H̃n = {(t, a, b) | t ∈ T, a, b ∈ Rn }
(here T is the unit circle {z ∈ Z | |z| = 1}). The Lebesgue measure on Hn =
cn × Rn is left and right invariant Haar measure on Hn . Similarly, Lebesgue
R×R
cn × Rn is left and right invariant Haar measure on H̃n (here
measure on T × R
R
Lebesgue measure on T is normalized so that T dt = 1). The next result was
proved in [12, Proposition 3.2.4] for the special case n = 1. By interchanging the
roles of a and b the proof given there carries through verbatim to our case.
Proposition 6.1. If f, g ∈ L2 (Rn ), then
Z Z Z
|hf, π̃(t, a, b)gi|2 dtdbda = kf k22 kgk22 .
n
c
R

Rn

T

Corollary 6.2. The representation π̃ of H̃n on L2 (Rn ) is irreducible and square
integrable, and every g ∈ L2 (Rn ) is admissible.
Proof. By taking f = g in the above proposition we see immediately that every
element of L2 (Rn ) is admissible. Suppose g ∈ L2 (Rn ) \ {0} is fixed and assume
f ∈ L2 (Rn ) satisfies hf, π̃(t, a, b)gi = 0 for all (t, a, b) ∈ H̃n . Then kf k2kgk2 = 0
and it follows that f = 0. Hence π̃ is irreducible as desired.


12

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN

Proposition 6.3. Let n ∈ N, let (ak , bk ) ∈ R2n be distinct nonzero elements such
that (ak , bk ) generate a discrete subgroup of R2n and ah · bk ∈ Q for all h, k (where
k, h ∈ N). If r ∈ N and
r
X
ck e2πibk ·t f (t + ak ) = 0
k=1

with 0 6= ck ∈ C constants, then f = 0.

Proof. We have R2n = H̃n /T. Lift the (ak , bk ) to the elements gk := (1, ak , bk ) ∈
H̃n . Note that the hypothesis ah · bk ∈ Q ensures that hg1 , . . . , gr i is a discrete
Pr
subgroup of H̃n . We claim that if 0 6= dk ∈ C, then α := k=1 dk gk is a nonzerodivisor in CH̃n . Indeed if 0 6= β ∈ CH̃n and P
αβ = 0, let T be a transversal
for T in H̃n containing {g1 , . . . , gr } and write β = t∈T βt t where βt ∈ CT. Since
R2n is an ordered group, we can apply a leading term argument: let k be such that
gk ∈ T is largest and let s ∈ T be the largest element such that βs 6= 0. Then by
considering gk s, we see that αβ 6= 0 because dk βs 6= 0, which is a contradiction.
The result now follows from Proposition 1.5, Corollary 6.2 and Theorem 5.2.

7. Shearlet Groups

We now investigate the problem of linear independence of left translations of
functions in L2 (S), where S denotes the shearlet group. This fits the theme of our
paper since S has an irreducible, square integrable representation on L2 (R2 ). We
begin by defining the shearlet group.


a √0
, Ss =
For a ∈ R+ (the positive real numbers) and s ∈ R let Aa =
a
0


1 s
and let G = {Ss Aa | a ∈ R+ , s ∈ R}. The shearlet group S is defined
0 1
to be S = G ⋉ R2 . The group multiplication for S is given by (M, t)(M ′ , t′ ) =
(M M ′ , t + M t′ ), where M ∈ G and t ∈ R2 (here we are considering elements of
R2 as column vectors). The left Haar measure for S is dadsdt
and the right Haar
a3
dadsdt
measure for S is a , so S is a nonunimodular group. A representation π of S
on L2 (R2 ) can be defined by
π(Ss Aa , t)f (x) = a−3/4 f ((Ss Aa )−1 (x − t)).

The representation π is square integrable and irreducible, see [4, §2] for the
details. We shall write fast to indicate π(Ss Aa , t)f . The function fast is also
known as the shearlet transform of f . Since the shearlet transform is realized by
an irreducible, square integrable representation of S on L2 (R2 ), the question of
linear independence of the left translations of a function in L2 (S) is related to the
question of the linear independence of the shearlets of a function in L2 (R2 ). The
question of linear independence of the shearlet transforms of f now becomes: Is
f = 0 the only solution in L2 (R2 ) that satisfies
(7.1)

n
X

ck fak sk tk = 0

k=1

where ck are nonzero constants and (ak , sk , tk ) ∈ R+ × R × R2 ?
Proposition 7.2. Let S be the shearlet group. There exists a nonzero function in
L2 (S) that has linearly dependent left translations.

LINEAR DEPENDENCY AND SQUARE INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS

13

Proof. The proposition will follow immediately from Proposition 1.5 if we can show
there exists a nonzero f ∈ L2 (R2 ) that satisfies (7.1), which we now do. Combining
[13, Theorem 4.6] and [9, Example 5] we see that there exists a continuous nonzero
f ∈ L2 (R2 ) that satisfies
X
(7.3)
f (x) =
a(β)f (A−1
4 x − β),
β∈Z2

where a(β) ∈ CZ2 and x ∈ R2 . The function f is said to be refinable. In the
literature a(β) is often referred 
to as 
a mask. The important

thing here is that
b1
4b
1
a(β) has finite support. If β =
, then set β ′ =
. Using (7.3) we
b2
2b2
obtain
X
a(β)43/4 4−3/4 f (A−1
π(S0 A1 , 0)f (x) =
4 x − β)
β∈Z2

=

X

β∈Z2

=

X

−1 ′
a(β)43/4 4−3/4 f (A−1
4 x − A4 β )

43/4 a(β)π(S0 A4 , β ′ )f (x)

β∈Z2

=

X

43/4 a(β)f4,0,β ′ (x).

β∈Z2

Hence, there is a linear dependency among the shearlet transforms of f , proving
the proposition.

Remark 7.4. The refinable function f used in the proof of the previous proposition
has compact support since a(β) has finite support [9, Theorem 5]. Compare this to
[19, Theorem 4.3] where it was shown, in a slightly different setting, that a compactly
supported separable shearlet system is linearly independent. Thus it appears that in
general the hypothesis of separability is important.
The next result gives a sufficient condition for linear independence of a shearlet
system.
Proposition 7.5. Let 0 6= f ∈ L2 (R2 ). Then {f1nt | n ∈ Z, t ∈ Z2 } is a linearly
independent set.
Proof. Let H = {Sn A1 | n ∈ Z}, then K = H ⋉ Z2 is a torsion-free discrete
subgroup of S. Because H and Z2 are solvable, K is solvable and thus satisfies
the strong Atiyah conjecture. By Theorem 1.6 the K-left translations of a function
in L2 (S) are linearly independent. The proposition now follows from Proposition
1.5.

The results obtained in this section are similar to the results from Section 3
for the affine group. This is not surprising since the shearlet transform involves a
dilation and a translation.
8. Virtually abelian groups
In this section we consider virtually abelian groups, that is groups with an abelian
subgroup of finite index.

14

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN

Proposition 8.1. Let G be a locally compact group which has an abelian closed
subgroup A of finite index, and let 1 ≤ p ∈ R. Assume that if 0 6= φ ∈ CA and
0 6= f ∈ Lp (A), then φf 6= 0. Let 0 6= f ∈ Lp (G), let H 6 G and let θ ∈ CH.
(a) If θ is a nonzero divisor in CH, then θf 6= 0.
(b) If H is torsion free and θ 6= 0, then θf 6= 0.

Proof. Note that CA is an integral domain. Let B be the intersection of the
conjugates of A in G, then B is a closed abelian normal subgroup of finite index in G. LLet {a1 , . . . , am } be a set of coset representatives for B in A. Then
m
p
p
Lp (A) =
i=1 L (B)ai and we see that if 0 6= φ ∈ CB and 0 6= f ∈ L (B),
then φf 6=L
0. Let {g1 , . . . , gn } be a set of coset representatives for B in G. Then
n
p
Lp (G) =
i=1 L (B)gi . We may view this as an isomorphism of CB-modules.
Set S = CB \ {0}. Then we may form the ring of fractions S −1 CG. Since every
element of S is a non-zerodivisor in CG, it follows that S −1 CG is a ring containing
CG. Furthermore S −1 CB is a field, and S −1 CG has dimension n over this field.
Therefore S −1 CG is an artinian ring, and since S −1 CB is a field of characteristic
zero, we see that S −1 CG is a semisimple artinian ring, by Maschke’s theorem. We
deduce that non-zerodivisors in S −1 CG are invertible. Using [8, Theorem 10.8], we
may form the S −1 CG-module S −1 Lp (G).
(a) If θ is non-zerodivisor in CH, then θ is a non-zerodivisor in CG and hence
is invertible in S −1 CG, so θ−1 exists. We may regard f as an element of
S −1 Lp (G), because S −1 Lp (G) contains Lp (G). So if θf = 0, then θ−1 θf = 0,
consequently f = 0 and we have a contradiction.
(b) If H is torsion free, then we know that every non-zero element of CH is a nonzerodivisor in CH; this was first proved by K. A. Brown [2]. Thus the result
follows from (a).

We now use the previous result to give the following generalization of [5, Theorem
1.2].
Theorem 8.2. Let G be a locally compact group with no nontrivial compact subgroups, and suppose G has an abelian closed subgroup of finite index. Then every
nonzero element of Lp (G), where 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, has linearly independent translations.

Proof. Since G has no nontrivial compact subgroups, it is torsion free. Furthermore
for 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, if 0 6= φ ∈ CA and 0 6= f ∈ Lp (A), then φf 6= 0 by [5, Theorem 1.2].
The result now follows from Proposition 8.1(b).


Theorem 8.3. Let G be a locally compact abelian group, let n ∈ N, and let 1 ≤
p ∈ R. Assume that p ≤ 2n/(n − 1). Suppose G has a closed subgroup of finite
index isomorphic to Rn or Zn as a locally compact abelian group. Let H 6 G, let
θ ∈ CH, and let θ ∈ CG and let 0 6= f ∈ Lp (G).

(a) If θ is a nonzero divisor in CH, then θf 6= 0.
(b) If H is torsion free and θ 6= 0, then θf 6= 0.

Proof. We apply Proposition 8.1 with A = Rn or Zn . We need to check the hypothesis that if 0 6= φ ∈ CA and 0 6= f ∈ Lp (A), then φf 6= 0. For the case A = Rn ,
this follows from [22, Theorem 3], while for the case A = Zn , this follows from [17,
Theorem 2.1].

Acknowledgments. The research of the second author was partially supported
by PSC-CUNY grant 66269-00 44.

LINEAR DEPENDENCY AND SQUARE INTEGRABLE REPRESENTATIONS

15

References
[1] Bachir Bekka, Pierre de la Harpe, and Alain Valette. Kazhdan’s property (T), volume 11 of
New Mathematical Monographs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008.
[2] Kenneth A. Brown. On zero divisors in group rings. Bull. London Math. Soc., 8(3):251–256,
1976.
[3] Joel M. Cohen. von Neumann dimension and the homology of covering spaces. Quart. J.
Math. Oxford Ser. (2), 30(118):133–142, 1979.
[4] Stephan Dahlke, Gitta Kutyniok, Peter Maass, Chen Sagiv, Hans-Georg Stark, and Gerd
Teschke. The uncertainty principle associated with the continuous shearlet transform. Int. J.
Wavelets Multiresolut. Inf. Process., 6(2):157–181, 2008.
[5] G. A. Edgar and J. M. Rosenblatt. Difference equations over locally compact abelian groups.
Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 253:273–289, 1979.
[6] Gábor Elek. On the analytic zero divisor conjecture of Linnell. Bull. London Math. Soc.,
35(2):236–238, 2003.
[7] Gerald B. Folland. A course in abstract harmonic analysis. Studies in Advanced Mathematics.
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995.
[8] K. R. Goodearl and R. B. Warfield, Jr. An introduction to noncommutative Noetherian
rings, volume 61 of London Mathematical Society Student Texts. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, second edition, 2004.
[9] Philipp Grohs. Refinable functions for dilation families. Adv. Comput. Math., 38(3):531–561,
2013.
[10] A. Grossmann, J. Morlet, and T. Paul. Transforms associated to square integrable group
representations. I. General results. J. Math. Phys., 26(10):2473–2479, 1985.
[11] Christopher Heil, Jayakumar Ramanathan, and Pankaj Topiwala. Linear independence of
time-frequency translates. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 124(9):2787–2795, 1996.
[12] Christopher E. Heil and David F. Walnut. Continuous and discrete wavelet transforms. SIAM
Rev., 31(4):628–666, 1989.
[13] Gitta Kutyniok and Tomas Sauer. Adaptive directional subdivision schemes and shearlet
multiresolution analysis. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 41(4):1436–1471, 2009.
[14] P. A. Linnell. Zero divisors and group von Neumann algebras. Pacific J. Math., 149(2):349–
363, 1991.
[15] Peter A. Linnell. Zero divisors and L2 (G). C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math., 315(1):49–53,
1992.
[16] Peter A. Linnell. von Neumann algebras and linear independence of translates. Proc. Amer.
Math. Soc., 127(11):3269–3277, 1999.
[17] Peter A. Linnell and Michael J. Puls. Zero divisors and Lp (G). II. New York J. Math., 7:49–58
(electronic), 2001.
[18] Wolfgang Lück. L2 -invariants: theory and applications to geometry and K-theory, volume 44
of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys
in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern
Surveys in Mathematics]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002.
[19] Jackie Ma and Philipp Petersen. Linear independence of compactly supported separable
shearlet systems. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 428(1):238–257, 2015.
[20] Mark A. Pinsky. Introduction to Fourier analysis and wavelets, volume 102 of Graduate
Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2009. Reprint of
the 2002 original.
[21] Ahmed Hemdan Roman. Zero divisors and linear independence of translates.
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/53956, 2015.
[22] Joseph Rosenblatt. Linear independence of translations. Int. J. Pure Appl. Math., 45(3):463–
473, 2008.

16

P.A. LINNELL, M. J. PULS, AND A. ROMAN

Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. 24061-0123, USA
E-mail address: plinnell@math.vt.edu
Department of Mathematics, John Jay College-CUNY, 524 West 59th Street, New
York, NY 10019, USA
E-mail address: mpuls@jjay.cuny.edu
Department of Physics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
E-mail address: ahmed.hemdan.roman@emory.edu

