How Do You Use Burnside’s Lemma for Dihedral Group (3) Colorings?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jay121
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Application
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Burnside's Lemma to colorings of geometric shapes, specifically an equilateral triangle and a regular hexagon, under the actions of their respective dihedral groups. Participants seek to understand how to count distinct colorings while accounting for symmetries such as rotations and reflections.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant struggles with applying Burnside's Lemma to color the vertices of an equilateral triangle using three colors and seeks help in identifying fixed points.
  • Another participant explains Burnside's Lemma and outlines the formula for counting orbits, noting the need to count fixed triangles under the actions of the dihedral group Dih(3).
  • A clarification is made regarding the counting of fixed triangles under reflections and rotations, with a correction on the number of fixed points for reflections.
  • A new problem is introduced involving the coloring of a regular hexagon with two colors, with the participant expressing difficulty in identifying rotations and reflections.
  • A suggestion is made to visualize the hexagon to identify its symmetries, and a definition of fixed points is provided in the context of transformations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the application of Burnside's Lemma and the need to identify fixed points, but there is some uncertainty regarding the specifics of counting fixed points for different transformations, particularly in the hexagon example.

Contextual Notes

Participants express limitations in understanding what constitutes a fixed point in the context of geometric transformations, indicating a need for clarity on this concept as it applies to different shapes.

Jay121
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Struggling to apply Burnside's Lemma to an example for the Dihedral group (3)

i.e

We colour the vertices of an equilateral triangle with three colours: red, blue, green.
We do not distinguish colourings if they can be obtained from each other by rotations
or reflections. Use Burnside’s Lemma to count the colourings.

Any help would be great (particularly on how to identify fixed points!)

Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, Burnside's lemma tells us that if G is a finite group that acts on X, then

[tex]|X/G|=\frac{1}{|G|}\sum_{g\in G}{|X^g|}[/tex]

Where X/G is the number of orbits of G, and Xg is the elements fixed by G.

Now, we put X the set of all coloured triangles. Dih(3) acts on this. Two triangles are the same under rotation and reflection if and only if they are in the same orbit. So we need to count X/G.

So, we need to count Xg for each g. In total, there are 33 number of triangles.
  • There are 33 triangles fixed by the identity.
  • There are 32 triangles fixed under reflection, and there are 3 reflections
  • There are 3 triangles fixed under rotation, and there are 2 rotations.

Thus

[tex]|X/G|=\frac{1}{6}(3^3+3^2+2.3)[/tex]
 
Do you mean

[tex] |X/G|=\frac{1}{6}(3^3+3.3^2+2.3)[/tex]

As there are 3 reflections?

Thanks for this its helped a lot :)
 
Yes, that's what I meant :smile:
 
Found a trickier one =\

We colour the vertices of a regular hexagon with two different colours. We do not distinguish colourings if they can be obtained from each other by rotations or reflections. Use Burnside's Lemma to count the colourings.

So |G|=2^6=64

Any help on how I go about identifying the rotations and reflections? I know that D(6) acts on this so we have 6 rotations and 6 reflections

I think my main issue with these problems is actually defining what is meant by a fixed point in this situation

Cheers
 
Draw a hexagon. Can you identify all the rotations and reflections in the hexagon? Turning the hexagon clockwise gives you rotations. The reflections can be described by picking two points and use that as reflection axis.

Now, for a certain transformation, a fixed point is simply a vertex that remains in the same spot before and after the transformation...

If you really understood the triangle example, then I don't think this should be a problem...
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
13K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 83 ·
3
Replies
83
Views
13K