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.

I'm studying a dynamical system with $\mathbf{D}_{3}$ symmetry (the symmetry group of an equilateral triangle), which is given by:

$\begin{align*} d\mathbf{x}_{0}/dt &= \mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x}_{2}, \mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{1}) \\ d\mathbf{x}_{1}/dt &= \mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2}) \\ d\mathbf{x}_{2}/dt &= \mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2}, \mathbf{x}_{0}) \end{align*}$,

where $\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2} \in \mathbb{R}^{k}$ and $\mathbf{f}(\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{w}) = \mathbf{f}(\mathbf{w}, \mathbf{v}, \mathbf{u})$.

Is a fixed point at $(\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2}) = (\mathbf{0}, \mathbf{0}, \mathbf{0})$ guaranteed by the symmetry in the problem?

share|improve this question
1  
Hardly: if (0,0,0) is a fixed point for some f, it is not anymore for the (quite symmetric) system based on f+1. –  Did Aug 13 '11 at 0:59
    
Make $f$ a constant vector and there are no fixed points... –  anon Aug 13 '11 at 1:15
1  
$f+1$ doesn't make sense, since $\mathbf f$ is a vector. –  joriki Aug 13 '11 at 4:29
1  
@joriki, right. Use $f$ plus your favorite nonzero vector. (I read your comment by accident, please use the @ thing.) –  Did Aug 13 '11 at 9:49
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 2 down vote accepted

No, a fixed point would only be guaranteed if there were no non-zero vectors $\mathbf f$ invariant under the symmetry group. In that case, all non-zero vectors $\mathbf f(\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0)$ would break the symmetry, which would guarantee $\mathbf f(\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0)=0$ and thus a fixed point at $(\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0)$. However, since you only have $D_3$ symmetry, you can choose $\mathbf f$ to be a constant vector in any direction orthogonal to the triangle; then the symmetry operations will leave it invariant, and the flow will lead away from the origin.

P.S.: I'm wondering, since $D_3$ is isomorphic to $S_3$, whether you don't actually mean spatial symmetry of an equilateral triangle but permutation symmetry of the coordinates. In that case, there's no reason to expect a fixed point at $(\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0,\mathbf 0)$, and as was pointed out in the comments $\mathbf f$ could for instance be any constant without breaking the symmetry.

share|improve this answer
    
Very helpful, thank you. I was trying to express that $\mathbf{D}_{3}$ acts on $(\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2}) \in \mathbb{R}^{3k}$ according to a permutation $\rho(\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2}) = (\mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2}, \mathbf{x}_{0})$ and a "flip" $\kappa(\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{1}, \mathbf{x}_{2}) = (\mathbf{x}_{0}, \mathbf{x}_{2}, \mathbf{x}_{1})$. –  G. Brown Aug 13 '11 at 14:52
add comment

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.