Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $S_n$ be the symmetric group. let $H=S_{d_1}\times\cdots \times S_{d_k}$ such that $d_1+\cdots + d_k=n$.

What does the following statement means:

every two embeddings of $H$ in $S_n$ are conjugate.

In my opinion this means that changing the order of $d_i$ gives conjugate subgroups. For example $S_{d_1}\times S_{d_2}\times S_{d_3}$ is conjugate to $S_{d_2}\times S_{d_1}\times S_{d_3}$ and to $S_{d_3}\times S_{d_1}\times S_{d_2}$ and so on ...

share|improve this question
    
In general, when faced with a term you don't know, it's best to ask the source (whether text or person) for a definition rather than assuming a meaning arbitrarily. –  user92843 Jul 3 '11 at 9:20

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I think that your interpretation is correct. It is certainly not true that any subgroups of $S_n$ that are abstractly isomorphic to $H$ are conjugate. The most famous example is that of two non-conjugate $S_5$ sitting inside $S_6$. So the statement must refer to the canonical embedding of $H$ in $S_n$, in which case the only way I can think of to obtain different embeddings is by permuting the $d_i$ (and then the statement is almost trivially true).

share|improve this answer
1  
I think it's more likely that the interpretation is incorrect, that the standard meaning of embedding is intended, and that the quoted statement is false (perhaps as part of a true/false question). This is entirely conjectural since neither of us has the initial source, unlike palio. –  user92843 Jul 3 '11 at 9:23
    
@Alex B. : thanks!! please where can i read on the example of two non conjugate $s_5$ sitting in $S_6$? –  palio Jul 3 '11 at 10:04
    
@user92843 : $S_{d_i}$ is embedded in $S_n$ as the subgroup permuting the $d_i$ first elements of $(x_1,...,x_{d_i},x_{d_{i+1}},...,x_n)$ –  palio Jul 3 '11 at 10:24
    
@palio See e.g. JA Todd, The Odd Number 6, Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 41 (1945) or en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… –  Alex B. Jul 3 '11 at 10:32

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.