MIT 18.701 — Lecture 12

Orbit-Stabilizer, Symmetries of SO3(R)SO_3(\mathbb{R})

§ Orbit and Stabilizer Definitions

Definition (Orbit and Stabilizer). Let GG be a group acting on a set SS. Then for any sSs \in S:

Example. Consider the group D4D_4 acting on the set R2\mathbb{R}^2.

Intuitively, any group action GG on a set SS yields a partitioning of SS into orbits.

Definition (Transitive). A group GG acting on SS is transitive if Gs=SGs = S for all sSs \in S; that is, there is only one orbit.

Remark. Any group action GG on a set SS is the disjoint union of transitive group actions GG on each of its orbits.

§ Same Orbit     \implies Conjugate Stabilizers

Theorem. (Same Orbit     \implies Conjugate Stabilizers) Let GG be a group acting on a set SS. Then for any s1s_1 and s2s_2 in the same orbit, the subgroups StabG(s1)\Stab_G(s_1) and StabG(s2)\Stab_G(s_2) are conjugates of each other.

In particular, for every sSs \in S and gGg \in G, we have StabG(gs)=gStabG(s)g1\Stab_G(gs) = g \Stab_G(s) g^{-1}.

Proof: Notice gStabG(gs)g' \in \Stab_G(gs) iff g(gs)=gsg'(gs) = gs, meaning g1ggStabG(s)g^{-1}g'g \in \Stab_G(s), which says ggStabG(s)g1g' \in g\Stab_G(s)g^{-1}.   \blacksquare

The above theorem is very powerful! Some implications:

§ Group Actions are Coset Actions

Here's a natural question:

Question: For any group GG and subgroup HGH \subseteq G, how can we designate GG as a transitive group action on some set SS such that H=StabG(s)H = \Stab_G(s) for some sSs \in S?

Here's a natural answer:

Answer: Designate GG as a group action on G/HG / H by left multiplication, where G/HG / H is the set of left cosets of HH in GG. Then GG acts transitively on G/HG / H.

Note that StabG(gH)=gHg1\Stab_G(gH) = gHg^{-1} for all gGg \in G; in particular, StabG(H)=H\Stab_G(H) = H. If HGH \unlhd G, then in fact StabG(gH)=H\Stab_G(gH) = H for every gg.

It turns out that the above is the only right answer!

Theorem. (Transitive Actions are Coset Actions) Suppose GG is a transitive group action on SS, and for some sSs \in S, we have StabG(s)=H\Stab_G(s) = H. Then the group action of GG on SS is isomorphic to the group action of GG on G/HG / H.

Proof: Equivalently, we seek a bijection f:SG/Hf: S \to G/H such that f(gs)=gf(s)f(g \cdot s') = g \cdot f(s') for all gGg \in G and sSs' \in S.

Since GG is transitive, we can write every sSs' \in S as s=gss' = g' s for some gGg' \in G. So equivalently, we seek an f:SG/Hf: S \to G / H such that f(ggs)=gf(gs)f(g \cdot g's) = g \cdot f(g's) for all g,gGg, g' \in G.

Turns out picking ff is really easy: choosing f(gs)=gHf(gs) = gH for all gGg \in G just works. But we still need to make sure this choice of ff is well-defined; that is, we must check:

Claim. If we have g1s=g2sg_1s = g_2s for some g1,g2Gg_1, g_2 \in G, then we must also have g1H=g2Hg_1 H = g_2 H.

Proof: Since g1s=g2sg_1s = g_2s, we have s=g11g2ss = g_1^{-1}g_2s, meaning g11g2StabG(s)=Hg_1^{-1}g_2 \in \Stab_G(s) = H. This means g2g1Hg_2 \in g_1H, so g1g_1 and g2g_2 correspond to the same left coset of HH, done.   \blacksquare

The above theorem is very strong! It has the following corollary:

Theorem. (Group Actions are Coset Actions) If GG is a group action on SS, and StabG(s)=H\Stab_G(s) = H, then the group action of GG on the orbit GsGs of ss is isomorphic to the group action of GG on G/HG/H.

§ The Orbit-Stabilizer Theorem

The previous theorem can be interpreted combinatorially, too.

Theorem. (Orbit-Stabilizer) For any group GG acting on a set SS, and any sSs \in S, we have G=GsStabG(s)|G| = |Gs| \cdot |\Stab_G(s)|.

Proof: Recall that actions of GG on GsGs are isomorphic to actions of GG on G/StabG(s)G / \Stab_G(s). Thus, GsG/StabG(s)Gs \cong G/\Stab_G(s).

Therefore, Gs=[G:StabG(s)]=G/StabG(s)|Gs| = [G : \Stab_G(s)] = |G| / |\Stab_G(s)|, which implies G=GsStabG(s)|G| = |Gs| \cdot |\Stab_G(s)|, as desired.   \blacksquare

Example (Cube Symmetries). Let GSO3(R)G \subseteq SO_3(\mathbb{R}) be the symmetry group of the cube.

Of course, all three choices of orbit GsGs yield the same result Gs×StabG(s)=24|Gs| \times |\Stab_G(s)| = 24.

§ Classifying Symmetries of SO3(R)SO_3(\mathbb{R})

We've been classifying geometric groups in R2\mathbb{R}^2 so far. Now it's time to handle R3\mathbb{R}^3.

Question. What do all of the finite subgroups of SO3(R)SO_3(\mathbb{R}) look like?

Let GSO3(R)G \subseteq SO_3(\mathbb{R}) be a finite subgroup of SO3(R)SO_3(\mathbb{R}) with size N=GN = |G|. The nice thing about SO3(R)SO_3(\mathbb{R}) is that—as shown at the end of Lecture 9—it consists entirely of pure rotations about an axis through the origin.

Definition (Pole). Let S2:={xR3:x=1}S^2 := \{x \in \mathbb{R}^3: |x| = 1\} be the unit sphere. Then every gG{id}g \in G \setminus \{\mathrm{id}\} has two poles, those being the two points of S2S^2 fixed by gg. Furthermore, we define:

P:={(g,p)gG{id} and p is a pole of g}.P := \{(g, p) \mid g \in G \setminus \{\mathrm{id}\} \text{ and } p \text{ is a pole of } g\}.

Here comes the clever observation; the proof of the following theorem is plain computation.

Theorem. (Subgroup Acts on Its Poles) We can view GG as a group action on PP defined by:

(g1,p1)P multiplication by g2G (g2g1g21,g2p1)P.(g_1, p_1) \in P ~ \xrightarrow{\text{multiplication by } g_2 \in G} ~ (g_2g_1g_2^{-1}, g_2p_1) \in P.

Remark. Where does this group action come from? Well, to construct a group action of GG on PP, we would first like to show that if p1p_1 is a pole of g1g_1, then g2p1g_2p_1 is a pole of some element of GG as well.

To prove this, the key is to notice that pp is a pole if and only if StabG(p)\Stab_G(p) is nontrivial. But recall that StabG(g2p1)\Stab_G(g_2p_1) is the conjugation of StabG(p1)\Stab_G(p_1) by g2g_2, so StabG(g2p1)\Stab_G(g_2p_1) is nontrivial if and only if StabG(p1)\Stab_G(p_1) is nontrivial.

Thus, g2p1g_2p_1 is a pole if and only if p1p_1 is a pole! It then remains to answer the question: which element of GG is g2p1g_2p_1 a pole of? The answer is g2g1g21g_2g_1g_2^{-1}, again because StabG(g2p1)\Stab_G(g_2p_1) is the conjugation of StabG(p1)\Stab_G(p_1) by g2g_2.

Say the induced group action on the set of poles partitions it into kk orbits of sizes n1,,nkn_1, \dots, n_k. We now count P|P| in two ways:

Setting these two quantities equal to each other yields the following Diophantine Equation:

2(N1)=i=1kni(Nni1)      22N=i=1k(11ri) for integers ri:=Nni.2(N - 1) = \sum_{i = 1}^k n_i\left(\dfrac{N}{n_i} - 1\right) ~ \implies ~ 2 - \dfrac{2}{N} = \sum_{i = 1}^k \left(1 - \dfrac{1}{r_i}\right) \text{ for integers } r_i := \dfrac{N}{n_i}.

The rest of the argument is solely number-theoretic; the first step is bounding.

Thus, either k=2k = 2 or k=3k = 3. Now this is just a pure number theory problem; it turns out the solutions are:

That's just five cases in total! It still remains to consider what each of these five cases means geometrically for the entire group, though—but the details are messy, so we omit them here.

It turns out that these five solutions correspond to the following five symmetry groups.

Rotation Symmetry Groups in R3\mathbb{R}^3.

And that's all the finite rotation symmetry groups in R3\mathbb{R}^3.

Remark. Recall the following step in the above argument.

Say the induced group action on the set of poles partitions it into kk orbits of sizes n1,,nkn_1, \dots, n_k. We now count P|P| in two ways:

  • For each of the nin_i poles pp in the ithi^{\text{th}} orbit, there are Nni1\frac{N}{n_i} - 1 nontrivial group actions that fix that pole; this is because of the Orbit-Stabilizer theorem.

    Thus, the ithi^{\text{th}} orbit contributes ni(Nni1)n_i \cdot \left(\frac{N}{n_i} - 1\right) ordered pairs (g,p)(g, p) to PP, so P=i=1kni(Nni1)|P| = \sum_{i = 1}^{k} n_i\left(\frac{N}{n_i} - 1\right).

  • For each of the N1N - 1 group actions gGg \in G, there are 22 poles pp that it fixes, so P=2(N1)|P| = 2(N - 1).

Is the truth of these statements unique to the setting of SO3(R)SO_3(\mathbb{R})?