Universal Kernel

power

How can automorphisms of incarnations in different theories be compared?

For a self-centralizing cyclic stabilizer, the residue k such that every seam to a conjugacy class turns the automorphism into the k-th power map; it depends on no seam, class or marking.

1021334256647510223644556173ℓ and its Singer cycle2ℓ: the fourth powerHall’s 2124powerHall’s 2, and τ
Plate 2.9A cyclic labelling of the Fano plane and its Singer cycle (ink). Hall’s multiplier 2 replaces the cycle by its fourth power (blue); on the flexes, τ\tau does the same.
Definition

Let x∈Gx\in G generate H=⟨x⟩H=\langle x\rangle with CG(x)=HC_G(x)=H, of order nn, and let KH={k∈(Z/n)×:xk is conjugate to x}K_H=\{k\in(\Z/n)^\times: x^k\text{ is conjugate to }x\}. For an automorphism aa of an incarnation YY of G/HG/H, the power of aa is the unique k∈KHk\in K_H such that s∘a∘s−1s\circ a\circ s^{-1} is the kk-th power map for every seam ss from YY to a conjugacy class (xj)G(x^j)^G.

Lemma(Power)

(a) The automorphisms of the conjugacy class xGx^G, as a GG-set, are the power maps y↦yky\mapsto y^k, k∈KHk\in K_H, and KH≅NG(H)/HK_H\cong N_G(H)/H. (b) Every automorphism of an incarnation of G/HG/H has a power. The power is a homomorphism Aut⁡G(Y)→KH\Aut_G(Y)\to K_H, and it does not change when the marking of YY is changed by an automorphism of GG.

Proof

(a) The class xGx^G is an incarnation of G/CG(x)=G/HG/C_G(x)=G/H. A power map commutes with conjugation and maps xGx^G to itself exactly when xkx^k is conjugate to xx. NG(H)N_G(H) acts on HH with kernel CG(H)=HC_G(H)=H, and nxn−1=xknxn^{-1}=x^k defines an injective homomorphism NG(H)/H→(Z/n)×N_G(H)/H\to(\Z/n)^\times with image KHK_H; so the power maps are ∣NG(H):H∣|N_G(H):H| distinct automorphisms, hence all of them.

(b) Another seam to (xj)G(x^j)^G differs from ss by a power map, and power maps commute; y↦yjy\mapsto y^j is a seam xG→(xj)Gx^G\to(x^j)^G commuting with power maps; and changing the marking by β\beta conjugates y↦yky\mapsto y^k to itself.

Remark

For PSL⁡(2,7)\PSL(2,7) the lemma applies to C3C_3 and C4C_4, with K={±1}K=\{\pm1\}, and to C7C_7, with KC7={1,2,4}K_{C_7}=\{1,2,4\}, the squares modulo 7. The class C2C_2 does not satisfy CG(t)=⟨t⟩C_G(t)=\langle t\rangle. On the object of size 24, two automorphisms of two incarnations correspond under some, equivalently every, seam if and only if they have the same power.

Theorem(Monodromy of the object of size 24) computed

(c) The three role seams from the cyclic labellings to the Heawood matchings differ pairwise by automorphisms; relative to the role 0, the roles 1 and 3 have powers 2 and 4.

(d) Squaring on 7A7A and on 7B7B has power 2; Hall’s multiplier ℓ↦2ℓ\ell\mapsto2\ell on the labellings has power 4; scaling vectors by λ\lambda has power λ2\lambda^2; and τ\tau on the flexes has power 4. Consequently, under every seam between the flexes and the cyclic labellings, τ\tau corresponds to Hall’s multiplier 2, and both correspond to the fourth-power map, the inverse of squaring, on 7A7A and 7B7B.

Proof

By machine, through the natural seams and the lemma. For scaling, the transvection of λv\lambda v is the λ2\lambda^2-th power of that of vv; for Hall’s multiplier, the Singer map of 2ℓ2\ell is ℓ−1∘(x↦x+4)∘ℓ\ell^{-1}\circ(x\mapsto x+4)\circ\ell, the fourth power of that of ℓ\ell.

Example

Hall’s multiplier theorem explains why 2 is a multiplier of the difference set {0,1,3}\{0,1,3\} modulo 7: 2 is the order of the plane. So the flex-tangent map of the Klein quartic and Hall’s multiplier on the cyclic labellings of the Fano plane, facts of two different geometries, are the same automorphism of the object of size 24, under every seam.

Built from
seamincarnation