Definition of The Notation
The following types of Euclidean transformation can occur in a group described by orbifold notation:
- reflection through a line (or plane)
- translation by a vector
- rotation of finite order around a point
- infinite rotation around a line in 3-space
- glide-reflection, i.e. reflection followed by translation.
All translations which occur are assumed to form a discrete subgroup of the group symmetries being described.
Each group is denoted in orbifold notation by a finite string made up from the following symbols:
- positive integers
- the infinity symbol,
- the asterisk, *
- the symbol (a solid circle in older documents), which is called a wonder
- the symbol (an open circle in older documents), which is called a miracle.
A string written in boldface represents a group of symmetries of Euclidean 3-space. A string not written in boldface represents a group of symmetries of the Euclidean plane, which is assumed to contain two independent translations.
Each symbol corresponds to a distinct transformation:
- an integer n to the left of an asterisk indicates a rotation of order n around a point
- an integer n to the right of an asterisk indicates a transformation of order 2n which rotates around a point and reflects through a line (or plane)
- an x indicates a glide reflection
- the symbol indicates infinite rotational symmetry around a line; it can only occur for bold face groups. By abuse of language, we might say that such a group is a subgroup of symmetries of the Euclidean plane with only one independent translation. The frieze groups occur in this way.
- the exceptional symbol o indicates that there are precisely two linearly independent translations.
Read more about this topic: Orbifold Notation
Famous quotes containing the words definition of and/or definition:
“Scientific method is the way to truth, but it affords, even in
principle, no unique definition of truth. Any so-called pragmatic
definition of truth is doomed to failure equally.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)
“The man who knows governments most completely is he who troubles himself least about a definition which shall give their essence. Enjoying an intimate acquaintance with all their particularities in turn, he would naturally regard an abstract conception in which these were unified as a thing more misleading than enlightening.”
—William James (18421910)