Representations of division algebras over local fields

On the Self-dual Representations of Division Algebras over Local Fields

Let k be a non-Archimedean local field of characteristic 0. Let D be a division algebra with center k and index n. The group D∗ is a locally compact group which is compact modulo the center. Its complex irreducible representations are finite dimensional. If π is an irreducible representation of D∗ which is self-dual, i.e., if π∨ denotes the dual of π, π∨ ∼= π, then there exists a D∗-invariant, ...

Triangulaizability of Algebras Over Division Rings

Nicely semiramified division algebras over Henselian fields

We recall that a nicely semiramified division algebra is defined to be a defectless finitedimensional valued central division algebra D over a field E with inertial and totally ramified radical-type (TRRT) maximal subfields [7, Definition, page 149]. Equivalent statements to this definition were given in [7, Theorem 4.4] when the field E is Henselian. These division algebras, as claimed in [7, ...

Kummer subfields of tame division algebras over Henselian valued fields

By generalizing the method used by Tignol and Amitsur in [TA85], we determine necessary and sufficient conditions for an arbitrary tame central division algebra D over a Henselian valued field E to have Kummer subfields [Corollary 2.11 and Corollary 2.12]. We prove also that if D is a tame semiramified division algebra of prime power degree p over E such that p 6= char(Ē) and rk(ΓD/ΓF ) ≥ 3 [re...

Representation Theory for Division Algebras over Local Fields ( Tamely Ramified Case

Aside from intrinsic interest there are three (related) reasons for studying the unitary representations of £-adic division algebras. (1) They provide heuristics for more difficult (e.g., noncompact) £-adic groups. (2) They would be basic building blocks in a theory of representations of reductive algebraic £-adic groups based on the philosophy of cusp forms. (3) There seem to be deep relations...