Proving the sign map is a homomorphism












0












$begingroup$


Definition: A transposition is a 2-cycle permutation.



Definition: A permutation $sigma$ is called even if its decomposition into transpositions has even number of transpositions; analogously for odd permutations.



Now, coming to the question, how do I prove using this definition that the sign map $operatorname{sgn}colon S_nto{pm 1}$ assigning a permutation in the symmetric group $S_n$ to its sign (+1 if even, -1 if odd) is a homomorphism?



I know how to prove it using the definition of the sign map being the determinant of the $ntimes n$ permutation matrix associated to a permutation (in which case it is obvious since $operatorname{det}$ is multiplicative).










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    Definition: A transposition is a 2-cycle permutation.



    Definition: A permutation $sigma$ is called even if its decomposition into transpositions has even number of transpositions; analogously for odd permutations.



    Now, coming to the question, how do I prove using this definition that the sign map $operatorname{sgn}colon S_nto{pm 1}$ assigning a permutation in the symmetric group $S_n$ to its sign (+1 if even, -1 if odd) is a homomorphism?



    I know how to prove it using the definition of the sign map being the determinant of the $ntimes n$ permutation matrix associated to a permutation (in which case it is obvious since $operatorname{det}$ is multiplicative).










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      Definition: A transposition is a 2-cycle permutation.



      Definition: A permutation $sigma$ is called even if its decomposition into transpositions has even number of transpositions; analogously for odd permutations.



      Now, coming to the question, how do I prove using this definition that the sign map $operatorname{sgn}colon S_nto{pm 1}$ assigning a permutation in the symmetric group $S_n$ to its sign (+1 if even, -1 if odd) is a homomorphism?



      I know how to prove it using the definition of the sign map being the determinant of the $ntimes n$ permutation matrix associated to a permutation (in which case it is obvious since $operatorname{det}$ is multiplicative).










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Definition: A transposition is a 2-cycle permutation.



      Definition: A permutation $sigma$ is called even if its decomposition into transpositions has even number of transpositions; analogously for odd permutations.



      Now, coming to the question, how do I prove using this definition that the sign map $operatorname{sgn}colon S_nto{pm 1}$ assigning a permutation in the symmetric group $S_n$ to its sign (+1 if even, -1 if odd) is a homomorphism?



      I know how to prove it using the definition of the sign map being the determinant of the $ntimes n$ permutation matrix associated to a permutation (in which case it is obvious since $operatorname{det}$ is multiplicative).







      group-theory permutation-cycles






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 26 '18 at 17:21









      learnerlearner

      689416




      689416






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          If it enough to know that the parity of the number of transpositions which appear in a given decomposition does not depend of the specific decomposition.



          Then if $sigma=t_1...t_n, sign(sigma)=(-1)^n$ this is well defined since the parity of $n$ does not depend of the composition. If $sigma'=t'_1....t'_{n'}, sign(sigma')=(-1)^{n'}$ and as $sigmasigma'=t_1....t_nt'_1...t'_{n'}, sign(sigmasigma')=(-1)^{n+n'}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            I know that; I don't see how that answers my question.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:28










          • $begingroup$
            you see now how it answer ?
            $endgroup$
            – Tsemo Aristide
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:30










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, I do. And I feel quite silly that I didn't think of it myself. Thanks.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:32











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053122%2fproving-the-sign-map-is-a-homomorphism%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1












          $begingroup$

          If it enough to know that the parity of the number of transpositions which appear in a given decomposition does not depend of the specific decomposition.



          Then if $sigma=t_1...t_n, sign(sigma)=(-1)^n$ this is well defined since the parity of $n$ does not depend of the composition. If $sigma'=t'_1....t'_{n'}, sign(sigma')=(-1)^{n'}$ and as $sigmasigma'=t_1....t_nt'_1...t'_{n'}, sign(sigmasigma')=(-1)^{n+n'}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            I know that; I don't see how that answers my question.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:28










          • $begingroup$
            you see now how it answer ?
            $endgroup$
            – Tsemo Aristide
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:30










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, I do. And I feel quite silly that I didn't think of it myself. Thanks.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:32
















          1












          $begingroup$

          If it enough to know that the parity of the number of transpositions which appear in a given decomposition does not depend of the specific decomposition.



          Then if $sigma=t_1...t_n, sign(sigma)=(-1)^n$ this is well defined since the parity of $n$ does not depend of the composition. If $sigma'=t'_1....t'_{n'}, sign(sigma')=(-1)^{n'}$ and as $sigmasigma'=t_1....t_nt'_1...t'_{n'}, sign(sigmasigma')=(-1)^{n+n'}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            I know that; I don't see how that answers my question.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:28










          • $begingroup$
            you see now how it answer ?
            $endgroup$
            – Tsemo Aristide
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:30










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, I do. And I feel quite silly that I didn't think of it myself. Thanks.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:32














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          If it enough to know that the parity of the number of transpositions which appear in a given decomposition does not depend of the specific decomposition.



          Then if $sigma=t_1...t_n, sign(sigma)=(-1)^n$ this is well defined since the parity of $n$ does not depend of the composition. If $sigma'=t'_1....t'_{n'}, sign(sigma')=(-1)^{n'}$ and as $sigmasigma'=t_1....t_nt'_1...t'_{n'}, sign(sigmasigma')=(-1)^{n+n'}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          If it enough to know that the parity of the number of transpositions which appear in a given decomposition does not depend of the specific decomposition.



          Then if $sigma=t_1...t_n, sign(sigma)=(-1)^n$ this is well defined since the parity of $n$ does not depend of the composition. If $sigma'=t'_1....t'_{n'}, sign(sigma')=(-1)^{n'}$ and as $sigmasigma'=t_1....t_nt'_1...t'_{n'}, sign(sigmasigma')=(-1)^{n+n'}$.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Dec 26 '18 at 17:29

























          answered Dec 26 '18 at 17:26









          Tsemo AristideTsemo Aristide

          58.1k11445




          58.1k11445












          • $begingroup$
            I know that; I don't see how that answers my question.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:28










          • $begingroup$
            you see now how it answer ?
            $endgroup$
            – Tsemo Aristide
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:30










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, I do. And I feel quite silly that I didn't think of it myself. Thanks.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:32


















          • $begingroup$
            I know that; I don't see how that answers my question.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:28










          • $begingroup$
            you see now how it answer ?
            $endgroup$
            – Tsemo Aristide
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:30










          • $begingroup$
            Yes, I do. And I feel quite silly that I didn't think of it myself. Thanks.
            $endgroup$
            – learner
            Dec 26 '18 at 17:32
















          $begingroup$
          I know that; I don't see how that answers my question.
          $endgroup$
          – learner
          Dec 26 '18 at 17:28




          $begingroup$
          I know that; I don't see how that answers my question.
          $endgroup$
          – learner
          Dec 26 '18 at 17:28












          $begingroup$
          you see now how it answer ?
          $endgroup$
          – Tsemo Aristide
          Dec 26 '18 at 17:30




          $begingroup$
          you see now how it answer ?
          $endgroup$
          – Tsemo Aristide
          Dec 26 '18 at 17:30












          $begingroup$
          Yes, I do. And I feel quite silly that I didn't think of it myself. Thanks.
          $endgroup$
          – learner
          Dec 26 '18 at 17:32




          $begingroup$
          Yes, I do. And I feel quite silly that I didn't think of it myself. Thanks.
          $endgroup$
          – learner
          Dec 26 '18 at 17:32


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053122%2fproving-the-sign-map-is-a-homomorphism%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Måne

          Storängen

          VLT Carioca