Bijection between Orbit and Stabilizer

In summary: The theorem states that the action on G/K_x is equivalent to the canonical action on G/K_x, which means that we can split the problem of understanding a group action into two parts. The first part is to find the orbits, and the second part is to study the action on G/K_x, for each different K_x.In summary, the orbit-stabilizer theorem states that if G is a group and K_x is a subgroup of G, then the action on G/K_x is equivalent to the canonical action on G/K_x.
  • #1
chaotixmonjuish
287
0
So I know this is the orbit-stabilizer theorem. I saw it in Hungerford's Algebra (but without that name).

So we want to form a bijection between the right cosets of the stabilizers and the orbit. Could I define the bijection as this:

f: gG/Gx--->gx

Where H=G/Gx

f(hx)=gx h in H

^ Is that what the function is suppose to look like? I'm really stuck on understanding the proof since it doesn't show me this function but it guarantees that it is a bijection. I'm not sure if there is a better way to word this question except, perhaps, what is the function between the right cosets and the orbit.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Have a look at theorem 3 on page 5 of this article. Is the function that the author defines in the proof what you're looking for?
 
  • #3
Sort of, but I'm getting kind of thrown off by his notation.

So the function that is defined is sending f: g*H---->Orb(x) where H=G/Gx.

Is this just saying that f(gh)=gx or f(g)=gx because H is everything that doesn't move x so its not really worth mentioning.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
He's saying that if [itex]y\in\mathcal O_x[/itex], then there exists [itex]g\in G[/itex] such that [itex]y=gx[/itex]. Then he defines [itex]f(y)=gK_x[/itex], where [itex]K_x[/itex] is the stabilizer subgroup for x. It's not obvious that this f is well-defined, because there could exist a [itex]g'\neq g[/itex] such that [itex]y=gx=g'x[/itex]. To prove that the above actually defines a function, we must prove that [itex]gx=g'x[/itex] implies [itex]gK_x=g'K_x[/itex].

Here's the proof: Suppose that [itex]z\in gK_x[/itex]. Then there's a [itex]k\in K_x[/itex] such that [itex]z=gk=g'g'^{-1}gk[/itex]. This is a member of [itex]g'K_x[/itex] if [itex]g'^{-1}gk\in K_x[/itex], and it's not hard to see that it is:

[tex]g'^{-1}gkx=g'^{-1}gx=g'^{-1}g'x=x[/tex]

This proves that [itex]gK_x\subset g'K_x[/itex], and we can of course repeat the argument with g and g' swapped.

So f is a well-defined function from the orbit [itex]\mathcal O_x[/itex] into the set of right cosets [itex]G/K_x[/itex]. The equation that defines f can also be written as [itex]f(gx)=gK_x[/itex].
 
Last edited:
  • #5
The very last function you defined is from the orbit to the stabilizer (I know its a bijection but I just want to make sure).
 
  • #6
No, [itex]gK_x=\{gk|k\in K_x\}[/itex] is a right coset, so

[tex]f:\mathcal O_x\rightarrow G/K_x[/tex]​

if we use the notation [itex]G/K_x[/itex] for the set of right cosets.
 
  • #7
Great, it all makes sense. However, how does this bijection prove that O*Gx:K=G. To me it just proves they are equal, but that can't always be the case.
 
  • #8
The theorem says that the action restricted to [itex]\matcal O_x[/itex] is equivalent (in a technical sense) to the canonical action on [itex]G/K_x[/itex]. This splits the problem of understanding a group action into two pieces: 1. Find the orbits. 2. Study the action on [itex]G/K_x[/itex], for each different [itex]K_x[/itex].
 

1. What is the concept of bijection between orbit and stabilizer?

Bijection between orbit and stabilizer is a mathematical concept that describes the relationship between the orbit and stabilizer of an element in a group action. It states that the size of the orbit of an element is equal to the index of its stabilizer, and there exists a one-to-one correspondence (bijection) between the elements in the orbit and the left cosets of the stabilizer.

2. How is bijection between orbit and stabilizer used in group theory?

Bijection between orbit and stabilizer is a fundamental concept in group theory that helps us understand the structure and properties of groups. It is used to prove important theorems such as the Orbit-Stabilizer Theorem, which states that the size of a group is equal to the product of the size of its orbit and stabilizer. It is also used in the classification of finite simple groups, one of the biggest achievements in group theory.

3. What is the significance of bijection between orbit and stabilizer in other fields of science?

Bijection between orbit and stabilizer has applications in various fields of science, including physics, chemistry, and computer science. In physics, it is used to study symmetries in physical systems, while in chemistry it is used to understand molecular structures and reactions. In computer science, it is used to design and analyze algorithms for solving group-related problems.

4. Can you provide an example of bijection between orbit and stabilizer?

Yes, consider the group action of rotation on a square. The orbit of any vertex is the set of all four vertices, and the stabilizer of a vertex is the set of rotations that fix that vertex. Since there are four rotations that fix a vertex, the index of the stabilizer is 4. This means that there is a bijection between the four elements in the orbit and the four left cosets of the stabilizer.

5. How does bijection between orbit and stabilizer relate to the concept of symmetry?

Bijection between orbit and stabilizer is closely related to the concept of symmetry because it describes the relationship between the set of symmetries of an object (orbit) and the set of symmetries that fix a specific point (stabilizer). It helps us understand how symmetries can be decomposed into smaller symmetries, and how they can be combined to form larger symmetries. This has implications in various fields, such as crystallography and geometry.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top