What is known about this type of group?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Someone2841
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group Type
Someone2841
Messages
43
Reaction score
6
Hello. I have been looking into group theory for its applications to subject I am studying. I am not a mathematician by profession or training, but I find it has great use to any analytical pursuit. With that said, I have outlined below type of group that I would like to know more about. For example: what other groups are like it?, is there anything strange about the way I've defined this group?, what would help in my understanding of this group and groups like it?, etc. Thanks in advance!

------------------------------------------------------------

Let ##C## be the cyclic ring of integers mod 12. Please note that arithmetic with elements of ##C## and its subsets will be assumed to be mod 12 unless otherwise indicated. Define the set ##M_{k \in C}## as
##\{x : n \in \mathbb{Z}, k-1 \leq n \leq k+5, x \equiv 7n\}##​

For example, ##M_0 = \{0,2,4,5,7,9,11\}##. These subsets ##M_k## clearly do not form subgroups of ##C##; however, a group structure can be imposed on them. Define the action ##S_k## on ##M_k## as

##S_k:M_k×M_k,m≡7(x+k−1)↦7((x+_7 1)+k−1)##**​

Where ##+_7## is addition mod 7. For example, ##S_0## would map 4 onto 11 since ##x=3## in the equation ##4 \equiv 7(x + k - 1)## and ##7((x +_7 1) + k - 1) \equiv 11##. Two iterations of the action (i.e., ##S^2_k##) would then map each element to the next element (e.g., ##9 \mapsto 11, 11 \mapsto 0, 0 \mapsto 2,## etc. in ##M_0##).

The set ##\{S^n_k\}_{n \in Z, 0 \leq n \leq 6}## forms a cyclic action group (with ##S_k## as the group generator) on ##M_k##. The identity action is ##S^0_k \doteq S^7_k## and the inverse action is ##S^{-n \mod{7}}_k##.

-------

**Edited from x-k+1 to x+k-1
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
May I ask what ##11## gets mapped to under ##S_0##?
 
micromass said:
May I ask what ##11## gets mapped to under ##S_0##?

I made a mistake. ##S_k## should be defined as

##S_k:M_k×M_k,m≡7(x+k-1)↦7((x+_7 1)+k-1)##​

in order to deal with the very case of ##S_0(11)##. In the equation ##11 \equiv 7(x + k - 1)##, ##x = 6## and so ##7((x+_7 1)+k-1) \equiv 5##. With this correction, ##11## gets mapped to ##5## under ##S_0##. Sorry for the mistake!
 
Someone2841 said:
is there anything strange about the way I've defined this group?,

Define the action ##S_k## on ##M_k## as

The only context that I'm familiar with for "actions" on sets is that there is a definition for a group action on a set. (Google tells me that there is also definition of a ring action - and a neat definition of a module: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/100565/why-are-ring-actions-much-harder-to-find-than-group-actions. ) To define a group action, you'd normally start with the group and show how it acts on a set. I think what you should do is define the "functions" S_k and prove the set of functions forms a group. The abstract group that it forms then has the "group action" on the set specified by the functions.

I don't know what part of your result depends only on having a ring-with-identity, a commutative ring with identity, or a field. You might think about whether a similar construction works when applied to mod 6 arithmetic.

An abstract and uspecific way to ask questions about your example is:

We have a finite group (or a ring) G. G acts on its own elements. As a group of functions, G may not contain enough functions to implement all possible permutations of those elements. Suppose we have a proper subset M of the elements of G and we define a set S of mappings of M onto itself. "in terms of" the operations of G. Further suppose that this set of functions S forms a group under the operation of composing functions. Must the group S be isomorphic to some subgroup (or subring) of G ? (i.e. can we implement the functions in the group S by functions that define the action of G on its elements?) Or is it possible to do something "fundamentally new" by creating an S in such a manner.

I'd guess such questions have been investigated, but I don't know good keywords for searching for results.
 
Last edited:
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
575
Replies
3
Views
441
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top