Why are certain transformations in the case of D4 group considered even or odd?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LagrangeEuler
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    even Transformation
LagrangeEuler
Messages
711
Reaction score
22
Why ##\rho,\rho^2,\rho^3,\rho^4## are even transformation and ##\rho\sigma,\rho^2\sigma,\rho^3\sigma## are odd transformation. I'm talking about case of ##D_4## group, where ##\rho## is rotation and ##\sigma## is reflection.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi LagrangeEuler! :smile:

What is the definition of even (or odd) transformation? :wink:
 
Not sure.
 
LagrangeEuler said:
Not sure.

ok, if you can't give a "mathy" definition, just give an ordinary english explanation (or example), and we'll take it from there :smile:

(go back to your notes or your book, if necessary)
 
tiny-tim's point is, I expect, that you cannot expect to understand any explanation we give as to why a specific transformation is, or is not, even or odd if you do not know what the definition of "even" or "odd" transformation is. And in mathematics definition are "working" definitions- we use the precise words of definitions is proving things. So we would expect to use the precise words of the definitions of "even" and "odd" transformations in proving that certain transformations are even or odd.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
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...
##\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...
Back
Top