Matrix Representation of Permutations: (1874)(36759)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the matrix representation of the composition of two permutations, specifically (1874) and (36759). Participants are exploring how to correctly represent these permutations in a two-row matrix format.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the process of composing the two permutations and how to represent the resulting mappings in matrix form. There are questions about the correct mappings and whether certain elements can map to multiple values.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered clarifications on the composition of permutations and the need to apply them sequentially. There is an ongoing exploration of the correct mappings, with some participants questioning their own understanding and others providing feedback on their reasoning.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of permutation composition and matrix representation, with some uncertainty about the mappings and the implications of the permutations involved.

Punkyc7
Messages
415
Reaction score
0
Write the following in two row matrix form.


(1874)(36759)



I have

[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]
[8 2 6 1 9 7 4 7 3]

my problem is couldn't 7 also go to 5 and have 8 going to 7 and 6 going to 7 so I am sure I am wrong but I am not sure why.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With (1874)(36759) they mean the COMPOSITION of two permutation. So you first need to apply (36759) and then (1874). So you first need to work out the composition before you write down the matrix.
 
oh that would make more sense. So how would I go about doing that.

would I say that
3->6
6->7
5->9
9->3

then
1->8
8->7
7->4
4->1

and since 6->7 and 7-> 4 I can say 6->4

[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]
[8 2 6 1 9 4 ? 7 3] and since 5 hasnt been used would I just stick it into get 7->5


[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]
[8 2 6 1 9 4 5 7 3]

Is that right?
 
Punkyc7 said:
would I say that
3->6
6->7
5->9
9->3

You forgot to put 7->5 here. You can read that off (1874)(36759)

[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]
[8 2 6 1 9 4 5 7 3]

Is that right?

Yes.
 
oops... Thank you.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
978
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K