Over the complex numbers, the inner product of characters extracts the multiplicity of an irreducible constituent. I will separate the object being defined from the consequence being claimed.
The data
A representation \(\rho:G\to\operatorname{GL}(V)\) replaces group elements by linear maps. Its character \(\chi_\rho(g)=\operatorname{tr}\rho(g)\) forgets bases while retaining remarkable decomposition data.
The first display fixes the mathematical data. I label it \(\mathsf{data}\) mentally, while the next is the \(\mathsf{claim}\); the bridge between them is the displayed \(\Longrightarrow\), not an automatic implication.
Derivation
The middle display is intentionally dense: it is where signs, bounds, multiplicities, or normalising factors are most likely to be lost.
Invariant content
The aligned summary deliberately puts the datum and conclusion on different rows. Mathematically, this is the distinction between specifying an object and proving a property of it.
Scope
Maschke's theorem needs \(\operatorname{char}k\nmid|G|\). In modular characteristic, invariant subspaces need not have invariant complements.
The important habit is to remember what was fixed before the calculation began and what was proved only afterward. The final display preserves that order.