Permutation Loops- successor operation

  • Thread starter Thread starter MathematicalPhysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Loops Permutation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the successor operation in permutation loops, specifically addressing the notation and understanding of permutations in group theory. The original post critiques the explanation of the successor operation found on a referenced webpage, highlighting confusion over the notation used for permutations. The conversation clarifies that the notation I = 123 represents the identity permutation, while A = (23) denotes a swap between elements 2 and 3. The conclusion emphasizes that a solid grasp of group theory is essential for understanding these concepts, as they relate more closely to abstract algebra than to combinatorics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of permutation notation and operations
  • Familiarity with group theory concepts
  • Knowledge of abstract algebra fundamentals
  • Basic comprehension of combinatorial principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of permutation groups in abstract algebra
  • Learn about the cycle notation for permutations
  • Explore the concept of identity and inverse elements in group theory
  • Investigate the relationship between permutations and combinatorial arrangements
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of abstract algebra, and anyone interested in deepening their understanding of permutation groups and their applications in combinatorics and group theory.

MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
in this page I've encountered this topic (it's a topic from combinatorics, so it's relevant to discrete maths with sets and so on [that's my justification to post it here o:) ), anyway from my point of view the page describes poorly the successor operation:
"The resulting
sequence of elements constitutes another loop, which we will call
the "successor" of the original loop."

here's an example of such successor from the webpage:
I = 123 C = 231
A = 132 D = 312
B = 213 E = 321
IDEACB = A
DEACBI = A
EACBID = B
ACBIDE = A
CBIDEA = A
BIDEAC = E
i don't understand why for example the first sequence of elements equals A (or is identical to it), perhaps i missed something from the explanation, anyone care to explain.

btw, here's the page:
http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath031.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is a better notation than this. When they say I = 123, they mean that I sends 1 to 1, 2 to 2, and 3 to 3. If you have X = xyz, then X sends 1 to x, 2 to y, and 3 to z. A more standard notation would be to write it like this:

Code:
X = [1 2 3]
    [x y z]

So X sends whatever is in the top row to the thing directly above it. So in particular, we have:

Code:
A = [1 2 3]
    [1 3 2]

A basically just swaps 2 and 3. This is commonly denoted as (23). We will use this notation from now on. X = (xy) means that it sends x to y, y to x, and leaves z fixed. X' = (x'y'z') means that it sends x' to y', y' to z', and z' to y'. We can denote I as (), since it does nothing.

Now, if you have something like:

(123)(23)(23)(132)(231)(12)(321)

then you read it from right to left. The right-most one sends 1 to 3. The next one leaves 3 fixed. The next one sends 3 to 1, and then 1 to 3, 3 to 2, 2 to 3, and finally 3 to 1, so this whole thing sends 1 to 1. Next, look at 2. The right most one sends 2 to 1, then the next one sends 1 to 2, the next one sends 2 to 3, then 3 to 2, then 2 to 3, then 3 to 2, then 2 to 3, so this whole thing sends 2 to 3. Obviously, it sends 3 to 2, so we get:

(123)(23)(23)(132)(231)(12)(321) = (23) = (32)

Note that (23) and (32) are the same. However, given your original notation, 23 and 32 are not even defined. You should also notice that (123) and (312) are the same, but given your original notation, 123 and 312 are defined but are not equal, since 123 is:

[1 2 3]
[1 2 3]

which is just (), and 312 is:

[1 2 3]
[3 1 2]

which is (132).

IDEACB
= ()(132)(13)(23)(123)(12)
= (23)
= A

as required. See if you can figure out the rest for yourself.
 
By the way, I don't think the site did a bad job of explaining things, it seems that you're just unfamiliar with the permuation groups. Do you know what a group is? As far as I can tell, this has much more to do with group theory (part of abstract algebra) and much less to do with combinatorics. There is some relation to the idea of permutations as a group, and permutations where you calculate things like "n arrange k," but from the part of that link that I read, this has much less to do with calculating things like "n arrange k" and more to do with group theory. At very least, it seems to require some knowledge of group theory but no particular knowledge of combinatorics. Maybe further down the page on that link, things are different...
 
ok, i understand it, a bit tricky i think but nice. anyway my knowledge on group theory mainly stands on knowledge of the axioms (and when the author did specify accosiativity and identity element it felt as if it's connected to groups), and the simple theorems with the identity element of a group, not a lot i know :blushing:

btw, thanks for the help.
 
If there are an infinite number of natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and... then that must mean that there are not only infinite infinities, but an infinite number of those infinities. and an infinite number of those...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
887
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
12K