Question about invariant w.r.t. a group action

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mnb96
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group Invariant
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of finding a non-trivial invariant function with respect to a group action defined by a subgroup of a group. Participants explore the conditions under which such an invariant function can be constructed and whether these conditions are known in a broader context within group theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a specific form for an invariant function, \(\chi(g) = \gamma(g)^{-1} \cdot g\), under certain conditions involving an automorphism \(\gamma\) that fixes the subgroup \(H\).
  • Another participant challenges the validity of the proposed conditions, suggesting that they do not work, but does not provide a detailed explanation.
  • A later reply confirms the correctness of the initial participant's calculation and clarifies that a homomorphism whose kernel contains \(H\) would satisfy the required condition for invariance.
  • There is mention of the normalizer of \(H\) in relation to the kernel of the homomorphism, indicating a potential area of exploration regarding group actions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the initial conditions proposed for the invariant function. While one participant initially disagrees, they later acknowledge the correctness of the calculations presented. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader applicability of the conditions and their relation to known theorems in group theory.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the properties of the automorphism and the subgroup, as well as the implications of the normalizer's role in the context of group homomorphisms. These aspects may require further clarification or exploration.

mnb96
Messages
711
Reaction score
5
Hello,

I have a group [itex](G,\cdot)[/itex] that has a subgroup [itex]H \leq G[/itex], and I consider the action of H on G defined as follows:
[itex]\varphi(h,g)=h\cdot g[/itex]
In other words, the action is simply given by the group operation.

Now I am interested in finding a (non-trivial) invariant function w.r.t. the action of H, which means finding a function [itex]\chi:G\rightarrow G'[/itex] such that [itex]\chi(h\cdot g)=\chi(g)[/itex] for all [itex]h\in H[/itex] and [itex]g\in G[/itex].

I realized that I can easily impose sufficient conditions on [itex]\chi[/itex] to ensure that it is an invariant function w.r.t. H.
Such conditions are:
  1. [itex]\chi[/itex] has the form [itex]\chi(g) = \gamma(g)^{-1}\cdot g[/itex]
  2. [itex]\gamma[/itex] is an automorphism of the group [itex]G[/itex]
  3. [itex]\gamma[/itex] fixes the subgroup [itex]H[/itex], [itex]\quad[/itex]i.e. [itex]\gamma(h)=h[/itex] for all [itex]h\in H[/itex]
The proof is very easy (just apply [itex]\chi[/itex] as defined in 1. to [itex](h\cdot g)[/itex] and use 2. and 3.)

My question is: Are the above conditions already well-known, perhaps in a more general form?
Is my construction just a specific application of some more general theorem in group theory?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your three conditions seem to not work but maybe I don't understand what you are saying.

In any case,,any group homomorphism whose kernel contains the normalizer of H would seem to work.
 
Hi Lavinia,

thanks for replying. I was wondering why you said that the three conditions I listed do not work. The proof went like this:

[itex]\chi(hg)= \gamma(hg)^{-1}hg[/itex] [itex]\quad\quad[/itex] (definition of [itex]\chi[/itex])
[itex]= \gamma(g)^{-1} \gamma(h)^{-1} hg[/itex] [itex]\quad\quad (\gamma[/itex] is an automorphism)
[itex]= \gamma(g^{-1}) \gamma(h^{-1}) hg[/itex] [itex]\quad\quad(\gamma[/itex] is an automorphism)
[itex]= \gamma(g^{-1}) h^{-1}hg[/itex] [itex]\quad\quad(\gamma[/itex] fixes H)
[itex]= \gamma(g^{-1}) g[/itex]
[itex]= \chi(g)[/itex]

Did I miss something? I think I have used all the three assumptions mentioned in my previous post.

I feel that what I have done here is essentially the consequence of some well-known construction/theorem in group theory, but I don't know which one. I didn't get completely your argument about the normalizer.
 
Your calculation is correct. I was confused.

A homomorphism whose kernel contains H will satisfy your required condition since all of the elements of H are sent to the identity. The normalizer is automatically in the kernel.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K