Every finite subgroup of isometries of n-dimensional space

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Battousii
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Finite Space Subgroup
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of finite groups of isometries in n-dimensional space, specifically focusing on the nature of rigid motions, symmetries, and properties of the Orthogonal group O(n). Participants seek clarification on definitions and implications related to these mathematical concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the notion of "rigid motion," questioning whether it refers to maintaining the order of vertices in polygon symmetries.
  • Another participant defines "rigid motion" as an isometry, explaining that it preserves distances between points in n-dimensional space.
  • A participant notes that a symmetry is a rigid motion that leaves an object unchanged, leading to the definition of a symmetry group.
  • There is a request for clarification on the meaning of the Orthogonal group O(n) fixing the origin.
  • A participant explains that every isometry in O(n) leaves the origin fixed and clarifies that elements of O(n) are maps or matrices, not vectors.
  • Another participant presents a mathematical expression involving a finite group of isometries and discusses properties of isometries in Hilbert spaces, suggesting that isometries are affine maps.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions of rigid motions and symmetries, but there are varying levels of understanding and clarification sought regarding specific properties and implications of these concepts. The discussion remains unresolved in terms of deeper implications or applications of the presented ideas.

Contextual Notes

There are assumptions regarding the definitions of isometries and affine maps that may not be fully explored. The discussion also involves mathematical expressions that may require further context for complete understanding.

Battousii
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
... fixes at least one point.

I recently came upon the proof in a book and I didn't quite understand the notion of "rigid motion", and I was wondering if you could help clarify it for me. Is it just "the vertices must stay in the given order", as used in symmetries of polygons? I've attached the proof.

Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • Rigidmotion.jpg
    Rigidmotion.jpg
    20.2 KB · Views: 490
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
A "rigid motion" is also called an isometry. An isometry is a function f:\mathbb{R}^n \mapsto \mathbb{R}^n so that |\bold{x}-\bold{y}| = |f(\bold{x}) - f(\bold{y})|. Where | \ | is the Euclidean metric. All this means it is a function such that the distance between any two points remains the same after the function is performed. Thus, in a sense it is "rigid", i.e. it leaves the object in tact. So reflections, rotations, translations are simple examples of functions which leave objects unchanged.

Given a set (or an object) in space a "symettry" is a rigid motion which leaves the object unchanged, i.e. it is its own image under the map. In that case we can define a "symettery group" on an object as the set of all symettries on the object.

I think what you are trying to prove is that the group of symettries on a finite set is either the dihedral group or a cyclic group.
 
Alright, thank you. That makes sense. Basically, a rigid motion will preserve distances and angles (in terms of vectors).

Can you clarify what it means when the Orthogonal group, O(n), fixes the origin?
 
Last edited:
It means every isometry in O(n) leaves 0 fixed. The elements of O(n) aren't 'vectors' - they're maps/matrices.
 
What they are saying in the book is this:

Let G be your finite group of isometries/rigid motions on a vector space V. Let v ∈ V be arbitrary. Define

w := \frac{1}{G} \sum_{g \in G} g(v)

now for any h ∈ G, we have h(w)=w:

h(w) = h\left( \frac{1}{G} \sum_{g \in G} g(v) \right) = \frac{1}{G} \sum_{g \in G} hg(v) = w

The second equality holds because (I think) an isometry of a Hilbert space is automatically an affine map (it maps affine combinations to affine combinations, and our sum there is an affine combination since the coefficients sum to 1).

The last equality holds because multiplication with a group element is bijective, so it is the same sum, just reordered.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
9K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
15K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
11K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K