Permutations written as product of 2-cycles

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Kaguro
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Permutations Product
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of permutations as products of 2-cycles, specifically examining the example given in a Group Theory textbook. Participants explore the uniqueness of such representations and the reasoning behind specific decompositions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the author provides a specific decomposition of the permutation (12345) into 2-cycles but struggles to identify a pattern in the representation.
  • Another participant suggests that the lack of a pattern is intentional, emphasizing that the decomposition of permutations into 2-cycles is not unique and that only the sign (odd/even) is invariant.
  • One participant expresses confusion about the equivalence of the products of 2-cycles, questioning how (15) can be represented as (52)(21)(25) and vice versa.
  • Another participant speculates that the author may have derived the representation by trying various products of 2-cycles or by conjugating a known representation with 4 transpositions.
  • One participant admits to not understanding the concept of conjugation yet and plans to revisit the material later.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the method used by the author to derive the specific decomposition, and there is uncertainty regarding the uniqueness of such representations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express limitations in their understanding of certain concepts, such as conjugation, which may affect their interpretations of the decomposition of permutations.

Kaguro
Messages
221
Reaction score
57
TL;DR
The decomposition of an n-cycle into 2-cycles can be done in various ways. I don't understand how to think of other ways.
I'm trying to learn Group Theory from Gallian's book. When I reached the chapter for permutation groups, the author gives an example that we can write (12345) as (15)(14)(13)(12). I immediately recognized that this should always work (I proved it later.)

Then author says we can write :
(12345) = (54)(52)(21)(25)(23)(13)

I checked, yes this works. But how did the author get such a horrific looking way to write the permutation? I don't see any pattern here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no pattern. It is only meant to demonstrate that such a decomposition isn't unique. E.g. ##(52)(21)(25)=(15)##. Only the sign (odd/even) is an invariant.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nuuskur and Kaguro
:oops:😐😶
No pattern?

Well, I can see why (52)(21)(25) = (15)
But I can't see why (15) = (52)(21)(25)

I mean, did the author just try a lot of products of six 2-cycles and ended up with one which simplifies to (12345) ?
 
Last edited:
Kaguro said:
:oops:😐😶
No pattern?

Well, I can see why (52)(21)(25) = (15)
But I can't see why (15) = (52)(21)(25)

I mean, did the author just try a lot of products of six 2-cycles and ended up with one which simplifies to (12345) ?
I guess he took a representation with 4 transpositions and simply conjugated one of them.
 
fresh_42 said:
I guess he took a representation with 4 transpositions and simply conjugated one of them.
Uhhh...
I have no idea about conjugation yet.
I'll read this again in a few days.

Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 68 ·
3
Replies
68
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K