Symmetric Group

The symmetric group on a finite set X is the group whose elements are all bijective functions from X to X and whose group operation is that of function composition. For finite sets, "permutations" and "bijective functions" refer to the same operation, namely rearrangement. The symmetric group of degree n is the symmetric group on the set X = { 1, 2, ..., n }.

The symmetric group on a set X is denoted in various ways including SX, ΣX, and Sym(X). If X is the set { 1, 2, ..., n }, then the symmetric group on X is also denoted Sn, Σn, and Sym(n).

Symmetric groups on infinite sets behave quite differently than symmetric groups on finite sets, and are discussed in (Scott 1987, Ch. 11), (Dixon & Mortimer 1996, Ch. 8), and (Cameron 1999). This article concentrates on the finite symmetric groups.

The symmetric group on a set of n elements has order n! It is abelian if and only if n ≤ 2. For n = 0 and n = 1 (the empty set and the singleton set) the symmetric group is trivial (note that this agrees with 0! = 1! = 1), and in these cases the alternating group equals the symmetric group, rather than being an index two subgroup. The group Sn is solvable if and only if n ≤ 4. This is an essential part of the proof of the Abel–Ruffini theorem that shows that for every n > 4 there are polynomials of degree n which are not solvable by radicals, i.e., the solutions cannot be expressed by performing a finite number of operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and root extraction on the polynomial's coefficients.

Read more about Symmetric Group:  Applications, Conjugacy Classes, Low Degree Groups, Properties, Relation With Alternating Group, Generators and Relations, Automorphism Group, Homology, Representation Theory

Famous quotes containing the word group:

    Unless a group of workers know their work is under surveillance, that they are being rated as fairly as human beings, with the fallibility that goes with human judgment, can rate them, and that at least an attempt is made to measure their worth to an organization in relative terms, they are likely to sink back on length of service as the sole reason for retention and promotion.
    Mary Barnett Gilson (1877–?)