The following reflexion came out of my irrepressible need to understand why the 3 double transpositions in , together with the identity, formed a group . Of course, one might just say: “they are stable under multiplication, as one sees by computing the 4·3/2 = 6 different products”, but who makes this computation anyway? And since I wanted not only to understand this, but to explain it to Lean, I needed an argument that could actually be done, for real. So here is an argument that requires no computation, besides the one that says that there are 3 double transpositions.
Prop. — The subgroup of generated by the 3 double transpositions is the unique 2-sylow subgroup of . In particular, it has order 4 and consists of these 3 double transpositions and of the identity.
Proof. — Let be the subset of consisting of these 3 double transpositions and of the identity. Let be a 2-sylow subgroup in .
We first prove . The subgroup has order 4. Let . The order of divides 4, so its cycles have lengths 1, 2 or 4. If there were one cycle of length 4, then would be that cycle, hence of odd sign. Consequently, either , or has a cycle of length 2, and then there must be a second because is even. Consequently, , as claimed.
Since , this shows that , hence .
At this point, we still need to understand why there are 3 double transpositions. More generally, I wanted to prove that the number of permutations in of given orbit type. The orbit type a permutation is a multiset of strictly positive integers with sum given by the cardinalities of the orbits of on . We write it as , meaning that has orbits of length (fixed points), orbits of cardinality , etc., so that . Let be the set of orbits of . The action of on a given orbit coincides with a circular permutation with order the length of this orbit; when it is nontrivial, such a permutation will be called a cycle of . The supports of these cycles are pairwise disjoint, so that these cycles commute, and their product is exactly . In fact, this is the only way of writing as a product of cycles with pairwise disjoint supports. (By convention, the identity is not a cycle.)
Theorem. — There are exactly permutations with orbit type .
A standard proof of this result goes as follows. Write the decomposition of such a permutation into cycles with disjoint supports as , leaving blank spaces for the values of the cycles (and, contradicting our convention, allowing for cycles of length 1…). There are ways to fill these spaces with the distinct integers between and , but some of them will give rise to the same permutation. Indeed, the entries in a cycle of length only count up to a circular permutation, so that we need to divide the result by . Moreoveer, we can switch the order of the cycles of given length, hence we also need to divide that result by (number of ways of switching the various cycles of length ), for all possible length .
This is reasonably convincing but one could wish for something more precise, both in the proof, and in the statement. In fact, in the preceding formula, the numerator is the order of . Since all permutations with a given orbit type are conjugate by , the left hand side appears as the cardinality of the orbit of a permutation of that orbit type, so that the denominator has to be equal the cardinality of the stabilizer of this permutation under the action by conjugation. Therefore, a more precise proof of this formula could run by elucidating the structure of this centralizer. This may also be interesting once one wishes to relativize the result to the alternating group in order to obtain a formula for the cardinality of the various conjugacy classes in .
Let us fix a permutation with orbit type . The stabilizer of under the action by conjugation is its centralizer , the subgroup of all which commute with .
We first define a morphism of groups Let be the set of orbits of ; this is a set with cardinality . Restricted to one orbit, the action of coincides with that of a circular permutation on (which fixes the complementary subset); these circular permuations have disjoint supports, hence they commute pairwise and their product is equal to . For , we write for its cardinality of its support, this is also the order of the cycle of defined by this orbit. If , then . Consequently, the action of permutes the orbits of , respecting their cardinalities. This defines the desired group morphism from to a product of permutation groups .
This morphism is surjective.
Indeed, given permutations of the set of fixed points of , of the set of orbits of length 2, etc., we construct such that . We fix a point in each orbit and decide that if has length . The formula imposes for all , and it remains to check that this formula gives a well defined element in . In fact, this formula defines a group theoretic section of .
What is the kernel of this morphism ?
If , then fixes every orbit . Since , we obtain that on each orbit , coincides with some power of the corresponding cycle, which has order . We thus obtain an isomorphism
To compute the cardinality of , it is now sufficient to compute those of and , and this gives the formula as was to be shown.
One of the interest of this argument is that it can be pushed forward to understand the structure of the conjugacy classes in the alternating group . The case is uninteresting, hence we assume . Then has index 2 in , and the formulas for the cardinalities of the conjugacy classes and imply that both are equal if and only if is not contained in ; otherwise, the conjugacy class is the disjoint union of and of a conjugacy class of a permutation which is conjugate to in but not in , and both have the same cardinality.
Examples of this phenomenon are classical. For example, the 5-cycles in are conjugate, but they constitute two distinct conjugacy classes under . Even more elementary, the 3-cycles and are conjugate in , but they are not conjugate in since that group is commutative!
So let us use our description of to give a full description of this phenomenon.
As a first step, when is contained in ? We have seen that is generated by the cycles . Consequently, is contained in if and only if all of them are contained in , which means that their lengths are odd.
We assume that this condition holds, so that , and now work on the image of . Its surjectivity was proved by the means of an explicit section . Given the preceding condition that , a necessary and sufficient condition for the inclusion will be that the image of this section consists of even permutations. This section is a morphism of groups, so it suffices to understand the sign of when consists of a cycle in and is trivial on the other factors. Then , by definition of . The formula shows that the non trivial cycles of are of the form ; they all have the same length, , and there are of them. Consequently, the sign of is equal to since is odd. This proves that the sign of is equal to the sign of . In addition to the condition that the orbits of have odd cardinalities, a necessary and sufficient condition for the image of to be contained in is thus that all symmetric groups coincide with their alternating groups, that is, for all . We can now conclude:
Theorem. — Let be a partition of .
- If for even , and for all , then there exist two permutations in with orbit type which are not conjugate in .
- Otherwise, any two permutations in with that orbit type are conjugate in .
We can check the initial example of two 5-cycles in which are not conjugate in . Their orbit type is : the only length that appears is 5, hence odd, and it has multiplicity . In fact, this is the only orbit type in where this phenomenon appears!