We have already seen abstract groups as permutation groups, or, more generally, as groups of bijections, in a number of contexts:
acting on itself by (left) multiplication, when we associated with each
a bijection
by
acting on itself by conjugation, when we associated with each
a bijection
by
-
acting on the set of (left) cosets
of a subgroup
when we associated with each
a bijection
by
We have also seen matrix groups at work as permutation groups (e.g. on the set of subspaces), permutation groups becoming matrix groups (e.g. represented by
permutation matrices), etc.
What unites all these examples is the concept of a group action.
Let
be a group and
be a set, with a group of bijections
An action of
on
is a homomorphism
![]()
There are many different types of actions, e.g. permutation actions when is a finite set and
the symmetric group (of all permutations of
linear actions, when is a vector space, and
a group of its linear transformations (i.e. matrix groups), etc.
By the homomorphism theorem, An action satisfying
is called faithful (or effective).
For instance, the action of on itself by (left) multiplication is always faithful, but the action on cosets of an
need not be faithful. E.g. it will not be faithful if
is commutative and
Orbits and point stabilisers
An action of
on
defines an equivalence relation
on
as follows:
iff there exists
such that
The equivalence classes of
are called orbits (more precisely, orbits of
on
).
Let and
Then
is called the stabiliser of
in
and denoted
Let for some
What can be said about
Indeed, the coset consists of the elements of
that map
to
Thus any
fixes
and any
that fixes
belongs to
as
When we consider the action of
on itself by conjugation, the orbits are called conjugacy classes.
For instance, the conjugacy classes of the symmetric group on
letters, can be shown to be in 1-to-1 correspondence with the unordered partitions of
into parts
where
as follows:
Let a permutation be written in the cyclic notation. Then for any
one has
and so we can transform to any permutation with cycles of the same lengths
Equivalent actions
When do two actions and
of a group
on, respectively, sets
and
can be viewed as “the same”? Obviously we need a bijection
to exist, that also “respects”
in the sense that
for all
and
Such an
is called a
-equivariant bijection, and is said to define an isomorphism of actions.
An action that has just one orbit is called transitive.
Let
be a transitive action of
on
Then
is isomorphic to the action on
for any
where we denoted by
the preimage of
in
![]()
This isomorphism of actions is given by such that
where
Indeed,
-
is obviously a bijection
-
iff
iff
iff
-
is
-equivariant. Indeed, let
Then for any
one has
as claimed.
Finally, for an action of
on
we can characterise
as
for an
Actions of matrix groups (a.k.a. linear actions)
Subgroups of the group, with respect to matrix multiplication, of invertible
matrices with entries in a field
have a number of natural actions, that all come one way or another from the vectorspace
Indeed, each
provides a bijection
by
for any
Moreover, such a bijection is even an automorphism of the vectorspace
(Automorphisms of vectorspaces are defined just as these for groups and rings: these are bijections preserving the corresponding algebraic structure (i.e. operations, etc)).
Apart from the action on the vectors of
(called the natural action (by left multiplication)) there is another action on the vectors, namely, by
(which one can equivalently writen as
). It is called contragradient action.
(Note that the map given by
is not always an action, as
and so
is not a homomorphism, unless we have a commutative group.)
Natural and contragradient actions give a simple example of two non-equivalent faithful (i.e. with trivial kernel) actions of one group, say, , with
on the same set
Indeed, if
were an equivalence of these actions, then
for all
and
Let and $f(v)=u$ so that
and
are linearly independent. In the basis
, take
Then
We see that
a contradiction.
If, on the other hand, and
are always linearly dependent,
we take the same in the standard basis
and see that
for some
again a contradiction. The argument showing non-equivalence in the case
is similar. For
these two actions are isomorphic, as
is commutative.
Another important class of actions is the action on on subspaces of
For simplicity, let us consider the action on the set
of subspaces of dimension
Given a
-dimensional subspace
and
we define
Then
is a
-dimensional subspace, as can be seen by choosing a basis
of
and observing that
is a basis of
Thus
induces a bijection on
When fixes a
we can choose a basis in such a way, that
becomes a group of
block matrices, discussed earlier here.In this case
has a normal subgroup acting trivially on
that is the kernel of the action of
on the quotient space
The centre of
acts trivially on
as it preserves every 1-dimensional subspace (indeed, any
equals
with
).
Projective line.
The simplest nontrivial is
when
This set is called projective line and denoted
and can be viewed as the set of pairs
as follows: every 1-dimensional subspace
of
can be described by equation
or by equation
To understand the action of an element of
on
consider
and
just as if we multiply a vector by
and then normalize either to
or to
depending upon whether or not