Is an Odd Order Permutation Always an Even Permutation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Redhead711
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Permutations
Click For Summary
A permutation with an odd order must be an even permutation, as demonstrated through the relationship between the order of permutations and their parity. The discussion highlights the need for clarity in notation and definitions, particularly regarding the terms "order," "permutation," and the variables involved. Participants suggest that the order of a permutation refers to its status as an element of the permutation group, specifically that A^k equals the identity for some odd k. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding how the product of odd permutations results in an odd permutation. Overall, the participants collaboratively work towards a coherent proof of the initial claim.
Redhead711
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I have been working with the following question for quite awhile:

Show that a permutation with an odd order must be an even
permutation.

I have made some progress, but I am having trouble putting it altogether
to make my proof coherent.

This is what i have so far:

Let e= epsilon
Say BA^(2ka+1)= ae. Then BA^(2ka)=BA^(-1).
But BA^(2k)=(BA^ka)^2 is even.

I know that I am on the right track but I can't seem to put
it altogether. Can someone help me please. If I could
just have it explained Iam sure I will understand.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It would help if you told us what your notation, etc. meant.

1. How are you defining the "order" of a permutation?

2. Are A and B premutations? If so which is intended to be the "permutation with odd order?

3. What is k? what is a?
 
I suppose the order of a permutation is its order as an element of the group of permutations, i.e. that A^k = id for some odd number k>0, and for no smaller positive integer.

Then we claim A is "even". Recall that a product of an odd number of "odd" permutations is also "odd"...

does that help?
 
Yes you have helped me very much, I think I have a handle on the problem know than you both. :)
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
922