On Thursday, 19 July 2012 19:33:48 UTC+8, Javier López Peña wrote:
>
> On Thursday, July 19, 2012 9:52:26 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>
>> let me nitpick first by saying that in group theory
>> "presentation" means "presentation by generators and
>> relations" whereas you mean a (linear) "r
On Thursday, July 19, 2012 8:47:20 AM UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> If nobody needs it before I will probably write the patch when I am back
> from traveling, something around mid september. Cool, Cool, Cool ! :-)
>
>
Dear Nathan,
It'd sure be great to have automorphism groups of gr
Thanks everyone for your helpful posts, which came in overnight.
We have the classical groups (GL, SL,...) from GAP as groups of matrices
(in a natural way) and we have the projective versions (PGL, PSL,...) from
GAP as permutation groups. Testing indicates you cannot switch it around
(project
Nathann Cohen writes:
>> Wasn't this supposed to be implemented by trac #10335?
>> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10335
>
> Ahem :-P
>
> Then it's just that Graph.automorphism_group does not know it. And it
> is trivial to update it then. Nice !! And thanks for the
> tip !!
> Wasn't this supposed to be implemented by trac #10335?
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10335
Ahem :-P
Then it's just that Graph.automorphism_group does not know it. And it is
trivial to update it then. Nice !! And thanks for the tip !!
If nobody needs it before I will p
Nathann Cohen writes:
> (and if I may interrupt, we also really need to be able to deal with
> permutation groups on something *different* from 1...n, which is
> GAP's choice.
> And I know that I am the first one to complain about labels instead
> of integers when it comes to a graph's vertices.
>
(and if I may interrupt, we also really need to be able to deal with
permutation groups on something *different* from 1...n, which is GAP's
choice.
And I know that I am the first one to complain about labels instead of
integers when it comes to a graph's vertices.
And I know that it is a nightma
On Thursday, July 19, 2012 9:52:26 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> let me nitpick first by saying that in group theory
> "presentation" means "presentation by generators and
> relations" whereas you mean a (linear) "representation".
>
Fine, maybe I should have use "realization" or "imploement
Le 19/07/2012 11:17, Simon King a écrit :
Hi!
On 2012-07-19, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
let me nitpick first by saying that in group theory=20
"presentation" means "presentation by generators and
relations" whereas you mean a (linear) "representation".
In this way of thinking, the most compact way
Hi!
On 2012-07-19, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> let me nitpick first by saying that in group theory=20
> "presentation" means "presentation by generators and
> relations" whereas you mean a (linear) "representation".
>
> In this way of thinking, the most compact way to represent Z_n is by
> generators
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 15:37:32 UTC+8, Javier López Peña wrote:
>
> I understand that from some point of view mixing groups and
> their representations is a bad idea, but many groups are naturally
> defined as transformation groups and using a matrix presentation
> is just as natural as descri
I understand that from some point of view mixing groups and
their representations is a bad idea, but many groups are naturally
defined as transformation groups and using a matrix presentation
is just as natural as describing them by permutations, or even more so.
Not to mention the huge size som
Le 19/07/2012 08:22, Dima Pasechnik a écrit :
It looks like a hack. IMHO representations and groups themselves should
not be mixed in one glass.
I agree on both points :
(1) mixing things in the same glass sometimes gives unwanted results ;
(2) putting both representations and groups in the sa
On Thursday, 19 July 2012 08:13:04 UTC+8, Rob Beezer wrote:
>
> I'm working (along with a summer research student) to expand the
> collection of small groups (and their representations) in Sage. A question
> about matrix groups, as built by GAP for Sage.
>
> For small, not-very-sophisticated g
14 matches
Mail list logo
