Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Do rotation permutations form a group, as it seems to suggest here?
Re rotation permutation: yes, they form a group because it’s just transporting the structure of the group across the given bijection on which the definition depends. But the language “rotation permutation of ” could easily invite confusion since it suppresses mention of this which is actually crucial. Clearly rotations relative to different ’s do not compose.
At first the article had the title cyclic permutation which could be defined as a transitive -set structure on : (normally considered given as ; also this definition allows the case where to be countably infinite, although usually one would constrain to finite). That would be the notion of rotation permutation but untethered to a particular .
Yes, the cyclic group.
[edit: ah, overlapped with Todd]
Isn’t the wording misleading at rotation permutation?
A rotation permutation is, roughly speaking, a permutation in which, if we view the elements of a finite set as people standing in a circle, everybody shifts one step to the right, or everybody shifts one step to the left.
This sounds to me like a generator.
Thanks David, fixed now.
Also attempted to improve the rotation permutations example according to Todd’s remarks (thanks!).
1 to 9 of 9