I am a beginner to quantum field theory and my course is based on Weinberg's QFT (vol. 1; chapter 2) - I have quite a few confusions.
I have had an introductory group theory course before, so, I know that there are mathematical structures called "groups" (sets of elements and an operator) satisfying some basic axioms and that we can construct representations which are linear maps (homomorphisms) from the group to a space of linear operators (which act on different linear vector spaces).
First, the text says that the Lorentz transformation matrices ($\Lambda$) form a "group" - this is easy enough (satisfies group axioms), but I have a question. When we talk about these forming a group, do we mean an actual "group" or some representation of an abstract group ("Poincare" group) that acts on the 4D spacetime - the $\Lambda$'s themselves act on the spacetime 4-vectors, $a^{\mu}$ (like operators - which are exactly what representations map group elements to)? For example, in case of SU(2), the matrices $e^{i \theta \sigma\cdot \hat{n}}$ are a representation of SU(2) that act on the space of complex 2D vectors while the group element is characterised by the continuous parameter, $\theta$. However, in this case, the unitary representations acting on the quantum states, $U(\Lambda)$, are characterised by $\Lambda$ as well - I am confused what these actually are; parameters characterising the group, the Poincare group elements themselves or a representation that acts on spacetime but is also used to characterise a different representation?
Second, the text talks about irreducible representations of the Poincare group - we define the action of the unitary representation on a state $|\Psi(p,\sigma)\rangle$ as, $$ U(\Lambda)|\Psi(p,\sigma)\rangle = \sum_{\sigma'} C_{\sigma', \sigma} (\Lambda, p) |\Psi(\Lambda p,\sigma')\rangle$$
It says,
In general, it may be possible by using suitable linear combinations of the $|\Psi(p,σ)\rangle$ to choose the $σ$ labels in such a way that $C_{σ′,σ}(Λ,p)$ is block-diagonal; in other words, so that the $|\Psi(p,σ)\rangle$ with $σ$ within any one block by themselves furnish a representation of the inhomogeneous Lorentz group.
What exactly are we doing here? $U$ is the representation of the Poincare group and I understand the mathematical steps that follow this - choosing the standard 4-momentum, $k^{\mu}$, and looking at how $D_{σ′,σ}$ (which comes from the transformations that leave $k^{\mu}$ invariant) are related to $C_{σ′,σ}(Λ,p)$ and so on - but I do not understand why we are doing this. Why do we want to find out $C_{σ′,σ}(Λ,p)$ and why is it being called an irreducible representation of the group (if I understand correctly) and how does $D_{\sigma',\sigma}$ help in this?
In case of rotations, we say, $\mathcal{D}(R) |j,m\rangle = \sum_{m'} \mathcal{D}^{(j)}_{m',m}|j,m'\rangle$ with $\mathcal{D}^{(j)}_{m',m}$ being an irreducible representation. If we try to compare the two equations, we should expect a superposition over $p$ rather than $\sigma$ ($\mathcal{D}(R)$ has elements $\mathcal{D}^{(j)}_{m',m}$, but why does $U(\Lambda)$ have elements like $C_{σ′,σ}(Λ,p)$?) - however, it is different here. It is not even a sum over both $(p, \sigma)$ but only $\sigma$.
I am sorry if these questions are dumb, but I am new to this and unable to relate what I learnt in my group theory classes to what is being done here and am really confused. I will be glad for any clarification, thanks!
I also did go through the various questions on this forum on the same paragraph I quoted - but I didn't really find anything that answers my questions much.
Edit:
Following the equation in Weinberg (given above), we take the cases of the massless and massive particles and choose a proper 4-momentum, $k^{\mu}$ and define the state above as, $$ |\Psi(p, \sigma)\rangle = N(p)U(L(p))|\Psi(k^{\mu}, \sigma)\rangle$$ $N$ is a normalisation and $p^{\mu} = L^{\mu}_{\phantom{-} \nu}(p) k^{\nu}$. This is clearly contrary to the first equation - why is there no sum over $\sigma'$ here?
I understand that it may be a lot to answer, so I would be happy if someone just points me to a more accessible reference as well. Thanks again!