2

I'm looking at the symmetries of some geometric object which I think should be the simple group $G$ of order 168. I have in my possession symmetries $\alpha$, $\beta$, and $\gamma$ of orders $2$, $3$, and $7$ respectively, which I think should be enough to generate all of $G$, but I am having a hard time verifying this.

Here are the relations I've computed among $\alpha$, $\beta$, and $\gamma$ so far:

  • $\alpha\beta\alpha=\beta^{-1}$
  • $\beta\gamma\beta^{-1}=\gamma^4$
  • nothing recognizable in terms of $\alpha$, $\beta$, or $\gamma$ comes out of conjugating $\alpha$ by $\gamma$ or vice-versa.

The second relation shows that $\langle \beta,\gamma\rangle$ is a non-abelian group of order 21, and I've heard it mentioned that inside $G$, a subgroup of order 21 and an involution are enough to generate the whole group. Unfortunately, this mention did not come with a proof of this fact. What I know is that $G$ has a presentation $\langle x,y\mid x^2=y^3=(xy)^7=[x,y]^4=1\rangle$, so I'm hoping to be able to find $x$ and $y$ satisfying these relations from the elements I've described so far. I've been looking at setting $x=\alpha$ and then $y$ to be some conjugate of $\beta$, but I have yet to find any success. I'm looking for some help with this method of attack, or other strategies for showing that the group generated by my symmetries is actually $G$.

user26857
  • 52,094
Hank Scorpio
  • 2,747
  • A web query like "simple group 168" brings a lot of information, this one among others : https://math.stackexchange.com/q/323561 exploiting Sylow subgroups but if you want more, you should work with Magma software http://magma.maths.usyd.edu.au/calc/ – Jean Marie Jan 30 '22 at 12:45
  • You will find in this manual of Magma for finite groups https://www.math.uzh.ch/sepp/magma-2.19.8-cr/HandbookVolume05.pdf on page 1480 an example that should be of interest for you – Jean Marie Jan 30 '22 at 12:58
  • 2
    I would be interested about the geometrical origin of your group. Is it connected to one of the regular/semi-regular polyhedra ? – Jean Marie Jan 30 '22 at 20:31
  • Can you evaluate sequences of symmetries and check whether certain relations hold? – ahulpke Jan 30 '22 at 21:37
  • @ahulpke yes, I have representations of these symmetries as matricies over the complex numbers and I have the ability to multiply them and check whether certain relations hold. – Hank Scorpio Jan 30 '22 at 22:14
  • 1
    @JeanMarie I've done a bit of searching of that sort, but the expositions I've found have not been terribly helpful in suggesting specific approaches to finding the $x$ and $y$ I'm after. Thanks for the magma pointer - I'll check that out. And no, not directly connected to polyhedra - I'm sorry for not including more of the setup, but it's really long and kind of a pain to type out. I figured reducing the problem to just it's group-theoretical structure would be more understandable. – Hank Scorpio Jan 30 '22 at 22:18

2 Answers2

4

Your relations are compatible with a $PSL(3,2)$ (the simple group of order 168), as the following GAP computation shows:

gap> f:=FreeGroup("a","b","c");
<free group on the generators [ a, b, c ]>
gap> rels:=ParseRelators(f,"aba=B,bcB=c4,a2,b3,c7");
[ (a*b)^2, b*c*b^-1*c^-4, a^2, b^3, c^7 ]
gap> g:=f/rels;
<fp group on the generators [ a, b, c ]>
gap> q:=GQuotients(g,PSL(3,2));
[ [ a, b, c ] -> [ (4,6)(5,7), (2,4,6)(3,5,7), (1,2,4,3,6,7,5) ],
  [ a, b, c ] -> [ (2,4)(3,5), (2,4,6)(3,5,7), (1,2,4,3,6,7,5) ],
  [ a, b, c ] -> [ (2,6)(3,7), (2,4,6)(3,5,7), (1,2,4,3,6,7,5) ] ]

It takes a groups with the relations you give, and shows that there are three different ways that this would fit with the $PSL(3,2)$-quotient. Looking at the kernels of these quotients now would give you candidate relations to test for (in the hope that they will give enough restrictions to tie down the group).

If you want to try for the two-generators $x$ and $y$, you could try an explicit isomorphism, e.g. for the first quotient candidate. First, I ask to bring elements into normal form. This is not guaranteed to always work, but here it does:

gap> SetReducedMultiplication(g);

Now for the calculation:

gap> f2:=FreeGroup("x","y");
<free group on the generators [ x, y ]>
gap> psl:=f2/ParseRelators(f2,"x2,y3,(xy)7,[x,y]4");
<fp group on the generators [ x, y ]>
gap> Size(psl);
168

Since the command iso:=IsomorphismGroups(psl,Image(q[1])); does not yet work in GAP 4.11, we split it into two steps:

gap> isop:=IsomorphismPermGroup(psl);
[ x, y ] -> [ (1,2)(4,5), (2,3,4)(5,6,7) ]
gap> iso:=IsomorphismGroups(Image(isop),Image(q[1]));
[ (1,2)(4,5), (2,3,7,5)(4,6) ] -> [ (1,4)(3,6), (2,3)(4,6,5,7) ]
gap> iso:=isop*iso;
[ x, y ] -> [ (1,4)(3,6), (1,2,3)(4,5,7) ]
gap> List(GeneratorsOfGroup(psl),x->PreImagesRepresentative(q[1],
> ImagesRepresentative(iso,x)));
[ (a*c)^2, a*b*a ]

So in this case you could try $(\alpha\gamma)^2$ for $x$ and $\alpha\beta\alpha$ for $y$. (The other two quotients get a bit more complicated.)

ahulpke
  • 18,416
  • 1
  • 21
  • 38
  • Thanks very much for this - this is very helpful. The first presentation doesn't quite work, so it looks like it's time for me to install GAP, find the other two presentations, and try them. I'll report back once I've finished. – Hank Scorpio Jan 30 '22 at 22:32
  • Hi, could I ask what version of GAP you're running and on what system? I downloaded version 4.11.1 and ran it on 64 bit Windows 10 and received Error, Assertion failure in Length( GeneratorsOfPresentation( pres ) ) = Length( gens ) while attempting to execute iso:=IsomorphismGroups(psl,Image(q[1])); in the code you've written here. – Hank Scorpio Jan 31 '22 at 00:43
  • @HankScorpio (I am using the development version.) This seems to be a shortcoming where the functionality does not yet work in 4.11. I have changed the exampel to split the isomorphism into two steps first. – ahulpke Jan 31 '22 at 15:21
  • That fixes it! Thank you so much - your answer has been extremely helpful. It turns out the third quotient is the one that works for my problem. – Hank Scorpio Jan 31 '22 at 21:39
1

The subgroup $H$ generated by elements of orders $2$, $3$ and $7$ has order divisible by $42$, so it has index $4$, $2$ or $1$ in $G$.

If it had index $4$ then there would be a nontrivial homomorphism $G \to S_4$, which contradicts the simplicity of $G$, and it is even clearer that it cannot have index $2$, so we must have $H=G$.

Derek Holt
  • 90,008
  • I think perhaps we have not communicated clearly. Unfortunately I have yet to prove that the group generated by $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ is actually $G$ - all I've got is those three elements and a couple relations and I want to prove that the group generated by those elements is $G$, but there's a possibility it could be something else. Thank you for the input, though. – Hank Scorpio Jan 30 '22 at 22:14
  • I don't understand. It seems to me that I have proved that they do generate $G$. Are you saying that you are not certain whether $\alpha,\beta,\gamma \in G$? Or are you saying that you are not certain that $G$ is a simple group of order $168$? – Derek Holt Jan 31 '22 at 08:52
  • I have symmetries $\alpha$, $\beta$, and $\gamma$. I conjecture $\langle \alpha,\beta,\gamma\rangle$ is the simple group of order $168$, and I am looking to prove this by showing that some elements in $\langle \alpha,\beta,\gamma\rangle$ satisfy the relations defining the simple group of order $168$. (I have some other information which shows that my group of symmetries can't contain a group of order $168$ as a proper subgroup, and therefore if $\langle \alpha,\beta,\gamma\rangle$ contains such a group it must actually be that group.) – Hank Scorpio Jan 31 '22 at 19:15
  • Ah I see, thanks! Do you have any kind of upper bound on the order of $\langle \alpha,\beta,\gamma\rangle$? – Derek Holt Jan 31 '22 at 19:52
  • As has been pointed out, you do not yet have enough relations to answer the question. The order of $\alpha\gamma$ could be $3$, $4$, or $7$. Do you have any way of finding out which? If you could prove it is $3$ or $4$, then I think that would be enough to prove the result. If it is $7$, then you will need yet another relation. – Derek Holt Jan 31 '22 at 20:12
  • Turns out it's order 7. By following the procedure from the other answer, I was able to find a presentation that worked. Thanks for your help. – Hank Scorpio Jan 31 '22 at 21:40