Does this property characterize abelian groups?












8












$begingroup$


Let $G$ be a group. Suppose there exists an integer $k>1$ and a non-identity permutation $pi in S_k$ such that for all $x_1, x_2 cdots x_k neq mathbf{1} in G$ we have that $x_1x_2x_3 cdots x_k = x_{pi(1)}x_{pi(2)}x_{pi(3)} cdots x_{pi(k)}$. Must $G$ be abelian?



This question is motivated by this. I've attempted to use Andrés technique in the linked post again here, but to no avail. I've also attempted to look at classical non-abelian groups like $S_3$ and $GL_n(mathbf{C})$ for counterexamples but also to no avail.



If this is false, is it possible that there's some conditions on the permutation $pi$ which makes this true? Because, again looking over the linked post, it is clear that some permutations force abelianness.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    8












    $begingroup$


    Let $G$ be a group. Suppose there exists an integer $k>1$ and a non-identity permutation $pi in S_k$ such that for all $x_1, x_2 cdots x_k neq mathbf{1} in G$ we have that $x_1x_2x_3 cdots x_k = x_{pi(1)}x_{pi(2)}x_{pi(3)} cdots x_{pi(k)}$. Must $G$ be abelian?



    This question is motivated by this. I've attempted to use Andrés technique in the linked post again here, but to no avail. I've also attempted to look at classical non-abelian groups like $S_3$ and $GL_n(mathbf{C})$ for counterexamples but also to no avail.



    If this is false, is it possible that there's some conditions on the permutation $pi$ which makes this true? Because, again looking over the linked post, it is clear that some permutations force abelianness.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      8












      8








      8


      2



      $begingroup$


      Let $G$ be a group. Suppose there exists an integer $k>1$ and a non-identity permutation $pi in S_k$ such that for all $x_1, x_2 cdots x_k neq mathbf{1} in G$ we have that $x_1x_2x_3 cdots x_k = x_{pi(1)}x_{pi(2)}x_{pi(3)} cdots x_{pi(k)}$. Must $G$ be abelian?



      This question is motivated by this. I've attempted to use Andrés technique in the linked post again here, but to no avail. I've also attempted to look at classical non-abelian groups like $S_3$ and $GL_n(mathbf{C})$ for counterexamples but also to no avail.



      If this is false, is it possible that there's some conditions on the permutation $pi$ which makes this true? Because, again looking over the linked post, it is clear that some permutations force abelianness.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Let $G$ be a group. Suppose there exists an integer $k>1$ and a non-identity permutation $pi in S_k$ such that for all $x_1, x_2 cdots x_k neq mathbf{1} in G$ we have that $x_1x_2x_3 cdots x_k = x_{pi(1)}x_{pi(2)}x_{pi(3)} cdots x_{pi(k)}$. Must $G$ be abelian?



      This question is motivated by this. I've attempted to use Andrés technique in the linked post again here, but to no avail. I've also attempted to look at classical non-abelian groups like $S_3$ and $GL_n(mathbf{C})$ for counterexamples but also to no avail.



      If this is false, is it possible that there's some conditions on the permutation $pi$ which makes this true? Because, again looking over the linked post, it is clear that some permutations force abelianness.







      abstract-algebra group-theory permutations






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Jan 2 at 23:29







      MathematicsStudent1122

















      asked Jan 2 at 22:44









      MathematicsStudent1122MathematicsStudent1122

      8,56822466




      8,56822466






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Yes. By induction on $kge 2$; $k=2$ is clear.



          Suppose $kge 3$. If $pi(k)=k$ then it's clear by induction. Otherwise, write $j=pi(k)$. Write the equality with $x_j=x_k$. It yields $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{pi(1)}dots x_{pi(k-1)}$; write $rho(i)=pi(i)$ for $1le ile k-1$, $ineqpi^{-1}(k)$, $rho(pi^{-1}(k))=j$ ($rho$ is the 1st return map on ${1,dots,k-1}$); then $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{rho(1)}dots x_{rho(k-1)}$ for all $x_1,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1. Hence, if $rho$ is not the identity, we are done.



          Then we see that $rho$ is the identity if and only if $pi$ is the transposition $tau_{j,k}$. Since the case when $pi(1)=1$ is also clear, it remains to assume that $pi=tau_{1,k}$. So we have $x_1dots x_k=x_kx_2dots x_{k-1}x_1$ for all $x_ineq 1$. If we find $x_2,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1 whose product is 1, we are done. This is obviously doable if $k$ is even (with $x_{2i+1}=x_{2i}^{-1}$ for $1<2i<k$, the case $|G|=1$ being trivially excluded); this is doable for $k=5$ as soon as $|G|ge 3$ and then for $kge 5$ odd ($|G|=2$ being trivial too). Finally, the remaining case is $k=3$ and the equality $x_1x_2x_3=x_3x_2x_1$, and this case was done in the linked post.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3060064%2fdoes-this-property-characterize-abelian-groups%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2












            $begingroup$

            Yes. By induction on $kge 2$; $k=2$ is clear.



            Suppose $kge 3$. If $pi(k)=k$ then it's clear by induction. Otherwise, write $j=pi(k)$. Write the equality with $x_j=x_k$. It yields $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{pi(1)}dots x_{pi(k-1)}$; write $rho(i)=pi(i)$ for $1le ile k-1$, $ineqpi^{-1}(k)$, $rho(pi^{-1}(k))=j$ ($rho$ is the 1st return map on ${1,dots,k-1}$); then $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{rho(1)}dots x_{rho(k-1)}$ for all $x_1,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1. Hence, if $rho$ is not the identity, we are done.



            Then we see that $rho$ is the identity if and only if $pi$ is the transposition $tau_{j,k}$. Since the case when $pi(1)=1$ is also clear, it remains to assume that $pi=tau_{1,k}$. So we have $x_1dots x_k=x_kx_2dots x_{k-1}x_1$ for all $x_ineq 1$. If we find $x_2,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1 whose product is 1, we are done. This is obviously doable if $k$ is even (with $x_{2i+1}=x_{2i}^{-1}$ for $1<2i<k$, the case $|G|=1$ being trivially excluded); this is doable for $k=5$ as soon as $|G|ge 3$ and then for $kge 5$ odd ($|G|=2$ being trivial too). Finally, the remaining case is $k=3$ and the equality $x_1x_2x_3=x_3x_2x_1$, and this case was done in the linked post.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              2












              $begingroup$

              Yes. By induction on $kge 2$; $k=2$ is clear.



              Suppose $kge 3$. If $pi(k)=k$ then it's clear by induction. Otherwise, write $j=pi(k)$. Write the equality with $x_j=x_k$. It yields $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{pi(1)}dots x_{pi(k-1)}$; write $rho(i)=pi(i)$ for $1le ile k-1$, $ineqpi^{-1}(k)$, $rho(pi^{-1}(k))=j$ ($rho$ is the 1st return map on ${1,dots,k-1}$); then $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{rho(1)}dots x_{rho(k-1)}$ for all $x_1,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1. Hence, if $rho$ is not the identity, we are done.



              Then we see that $rho$ is the identity if and only if $pi$ is the transposition $tau_{j,k}$. Since the case when $pi(1)=1$ is also clear, it remains to assume that $pi=tau_{1,k}$. So we have $x_1dots x_k=x_kx_2dots x_{k-1}x_1$ for all $x_ineq 1$. If we find $x_2,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1 whose product is 1, we are done. This is obviously doable if $k$ is even (with $x_{2i+1}=x_{2i}^{-1}$ for $1<2i<k$, the case $|G|=1$ being trivially excluded); this is doable for $k=5$ as soon as $|G|ge 3$ and then for $kge 5$ odd ($|G|=2$ being trivial too). Finally, the remaining case is $k=3$ and the equality $x_1x_2x_3=x_3x_2x_1$, and this case was done in the linked post.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                2












                2








                2





                $begingroup$

                Yes. By induction on $kge 2$; $k=2$ is clear.



                Suppose $kge 3$. If $pi(k)=k$ then it's clear by induction. Otherwise, write $j=pi(k)$. Write the equality with $x_j=x_k$. It yields $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{pi(1)}dots x_{pi(k-1)}$; write $rho(i)=pi(i)$ for $1le ile k-1$, $ineqpi^{-1}(k)$, $rho(pi^{-1}(k))=j$ ($rho$ is the 1st return map on ${1,dots,k-1}$); then $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{rho(1)}dots x_{rho(k-1)}$ for all $x_1,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1. Hence, if $rho$ is not the identity, we are done.



                Then we see that $rho$ is the identity if and only if $pi$ is the transposition $tau_{j,k}$. Since the case when $pi(1)=1$ is also clear, it remains to assume that $pi=tau_{1,k}$. So we have $x_1dots x_k=x_kx_2dots x_{k-1}x_1$ for all $x_ineq 1$. If we find $x_2,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1 whose product is 1, we are done. This is obviously doable if $k$ is even (with $x_{2i+1}=x_{2i}^{-1}$ for $1<2i<k$, the case $|G|=1$ being trivially excluded); this is doable for $k=5$ as soon as $|G|ge 3$ and then for $kge 5$ odd ($|G|=2$ being trivial too). Finally, the remaining case is $k=3$ and the equality $x_1x_2x_3=x_3x_2x_1$, and this case was done in the linked post.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                Yes. By induction on $kge 2$; $k=2$ is clear.



                Suppose $kge 3$. If $pi(k)=k$ then it's clear by induction. Otherwise, write $j=pi(k)$. Write the equality with $x_j=x_k$. It yields $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{pi(1)}dots x_{pi(k-1)}$; write $rho(i)=pi(i)$ for $1le ile k-1$, $ineqpi^{-1}(k)$, $rho(pi^{-1}(k))=j$ ($rho$ is the 1st return map on ${1,dots,k-1}$); then $x_1dots x_{k-1}=x_{rho(1)}dots x_{rho(k-1)}$ for all $x_1,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1. Hence, if $rho$ is not the identity, we are done.



                Then we see that $rho$ is the identity if and only if $pi$ is the transposition $tau_{j,k}$. Since the case when $pi(1)=1$ is also clear, it remains to assume that $pi=tau_{1,k}$. So we have $x_1dots x_k=x_kx_2dots x_{k-1}x_1$ for all $x_ineq 1$. If we find $x_2,dots,x_{k-1}$ not 1 whose product is 1, we are done. This is obviously doable if $k$ is even (with $x_{2i+1}=x_{2i}^{-1}$ for $1<2i<k$, the case $|G|=1$ being trivially excluded); this is doable for $k=5$ as soon as $|G|ge 3$ and then for $kge 5$ odd ($|G|=2$ being trivial too). Finally, the remaining case is $k=3$ and the equality $x_1x_2x_3=x_3x_2x_1$, and this case was done in the linked post.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Jan 2 at 23:32









                YCorYCor

                7,323828




                7,323828






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3060064%2fdoes-this-property-characterize-abelian-groups%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    'app-layout' is not a known element: how to share Component with different Modules

                    android studio warns about leanback feature tag usage required on manifest while using Unity exported app?

                    WPF add header to Image with URL pettitions [duplicate]