Does faithfull action of abelian group always has regular orbit?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
3
down vote

favorite












Good afternoon. I recall that a regular orbit is the orbit of the size equal to the acting group. My question is motivated by the following post. I don't understand why the faithfull action of abelian group always has regular orbit? (The last part of solution in the mentioned post). I will be gratefull for hints and expalanations.







share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    3
    down vote

    favorite












    Good afternoon. I recall that a regular orbit is the orbit of the size equal to the acting group. My question is motivated by the following post. I don't understand why the faithfull action of abelian group always has regular orbit? (The last part of solution in the mentioned post). I will be gratefull for hints and expalanations.







    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      3
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      3
      down vote

      favorite











      Good afternoon. I recall that a regular orbit is the orbit of the size equal to the acting group. My question is motivated by the following post. I don't understand why the faithfull action of abelian group always has regular orbit? (The last part of solution in the mentioned post). I will be gratefull for hints and expalanations.







      share|cite|improve this question














      Good afternoon. I recall that a regular orbit is the orbit of the size equal to the acting group. My question is motivated by the following post. I don't understand why the faithfull action of abelian group always has regular orbit? (The last part of solution in the mentioned post). I will be gratefull for hints and expalanations.









      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Jan 8 at 8:08

























      asked Jan 8 at 8:02









      Mikhail Goltvanitsa

      593314




      593314




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted










          Let me correct some definitions.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is faithful if the only element of $G$ that fixes all points of $X$ is the identity element, $1in G$.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is regular if the action is transitive and the only element of $G$ that fixes at least one point of $X$ is $1in G$.



          It is not true that a faithful action of an abelian group is regular. For example, is $sigma = (1;2)(3;4;5)$, then $G=langle sigmarangle$ acts faithfully but not regularly on $X = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5$.



          What is true is that, if $G$ is abelian, any faithful transitive action is regular. For this you must show that if $G$ acts transitively on $X$ and $gin G$ has at least one fixed point in $X$, then it fixes all elements of $X$. The argument goes like this: if $gx_0=x_0$ for some $x_0in X$, then for any $hin G$ we have $g(hx_0)=h(gx_0)=hx_0$, so $hx_0$ is a fixed point of $g$. Thus $g$ sixes all points of $Gx_0=X$. Thus it is reasonable to say that a faithful orbit of an abelian group is regular.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • Thank you, Keith. But we don't speak about regular action. We want to find regular orbit of action. And following M.Isaacs book Finite Group Theory this is orbit with the size equal to the acting group.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:27






          • 1




            Try to look at it from the perspective of the regular orbit. The orbit doesn't know that the rest of the set exists, and the group action is not gonna tell it that: the group just maps the orbit into itself. So from the orbit's perspective, the action on the group on it IS a regular action.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:31






          • 1




            @MikhailGoltvanitsa: I am traveling and don't have Isaac's book with me, but the definition you are using for "regular" is not the correct one. The one I gave is the correct one. (However your definition is equivalent to the correct one if $G$ is finite.)
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:38










          • Thank you, Keith. I understand. But in the mentioned problem we have that $<sigma>$ acts faithfully on the set $lambda_i cup lambda_j$ equal to the union of TWO orbits. And acts transitively on every orbit. So we can not argue that the action is faithfull on some orbit. Is not so?
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:43







          • 1




            No, see the example in my 4rth paragraph. A cyclic group can act faithfully on the union of two orbits without acting faithfully on either one.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:45

















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          More of a long comment actually:



          This is not true. Consider the subgroup $(1 2), (3 4), (1 2)(3 4) subset S_4$, which is isomorphic to the Klein four group. It is abelian and acts faithfully on the set $1, 2, 3, 4$ of four elements but does not have a regular orbit. I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic, but we have to think a bit more about if and how that would give us the desired property.



          UPDATE: It seems that the 'other post' I am referring to has since been deleted. Is that correct? Otherwise my post doesn't make much sense.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • "I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic" -- No. The problem is that the other post is not correct. If you look at my 4rth paragraph you will see that a cyclic group can act faithfully but not regularly.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:43











          • Yes I noticed. I had forgotten about how products of two cyclic groups can nevertheless be cyclic again themselves.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:45






          • 1




            Thank you very much, Vincent.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:50










          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );








           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2596566%2fdoes-faithfull-action-of-abelian-group-always-has-regular-orbit%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest






























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted










          Let me correct some definitions.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is faithful if the only element of $G$ that fixes all points of $X$ is the identity element, $1in G$.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is regular if the action is transitive and the only element of $G$ that fixes at least one point of $X$ is $1in G$.



          It is not true that a faithful action of an abelian group is regular. For example, is $sigma = (1;2)(3;4;5)$, then $G=langle sigmarangle$ acts faithfully but not regularly on $X = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5$.



          What is true is that, if $G$ is abelian, any faithful transitive action is regular. For this you must show that if $G$ acts transitively on $X$ and $gin G$ has at least one fixed point in $X$, then it fixes all elements of $X$. The argument goes like this: if $gx_0=x_0$ for some $x_0in X$, then for any $hin G$ we have $g(hx_0)=h(gx_0)=hx_0$, so $hx_0$ is a fixed point of $g$. Thus $g$ sixes all points of $Gx_0=X$. Thus it is reasonable to say that a faithful orbit of an abelian group is regular.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • Thank you, Keith. But we don't speak about regular action. We want to find regular orbit of action. And following M.Isaacs book Finite Group Theory this is orbit with the size equal to the acting group.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:27






          • 1




            Try to look at it from the perspective of the regular orbit. The orbit doesn't know that the rest of the set exists, and the group action is not gonna tell it that: the group just maps the orbit into itself. So from the orbit's perspective, the action on the group on it IS a regular action.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:31






          • 1




            @MikhailGoltvanitsa: I am traveling and don't have Isaac's book with me, but the definition you are using for "regular" is not the correct one. The one I gave is the correct one. (However your definition is equivalent to the correct one if $G$ is finite.)
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:38










          • Thank you, Keith. I understand. But in the mentioned problem we have that $<sigma>$ acts faithfully on the set $lambda_i cup lambda_j$ equal to the union of TWO orbits. And acts transitively on every orbit. So we can not argue that the action is faithfull on some orbit. Is not so?
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:43







          • 1




            No, see the example in my 4rth paragraph. A cyclic group can act faithfully on the union of two orbits without acting faithfully on either one.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:45














          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted










          Let me correct some definitions.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is faithful if the only element of $G$ that fixes all points of $X$ is the identity element, $1in G$.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is regular if the action is transitive and the only element of $G$ that fixes at least one point of $X$ is $1in G$.



          It is not true that a faithful action of an abelian group is regular. For example, is $sigma = (1;2)(3;4;5)$, then $G=langle sigmarangle$ acts faithfully but not regularly on $X = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5$.



          What is true is that, if $G$ is abelian, any faithful transitive action is regular. For this you must show that if $G$ acts transitively on $X$ and $gin G$ has at least one fixed point in $X$, then it fixes all elements of $X$. The argument goes like this: if $gx_0=x_0$ for some $x_0in X$, then for any $hin G$ we have $g(hx_0)=h(gx_0)=hx_0$, so $hx_0$ is a fixed point of $g$. Thus $g$ sixes all points of $Gx_0=X$. Thus it is reasonable to say that a faithful orbit of an abelian group is regular.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • Thank you, Keith. But we don't speak about regular action. We want to find regular orbit of action. And following M.Isaacs book Finite Group Theory this is orbit with the size equal to the acting group.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:27






          • 1




            Try to look at it from the perspective of the regular orbit. The orbit doesn't know that the rest of the set exists, and the group action is not gonna tell it that: the group just maps the orbit into itself. So from the orbit's perspective, the action on the group on it IS a regular action.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:31






          • 1




            @MikhailGoltvanitsa: I am traveling and don't have Isaac's book with me, but the definition you are using for "regular" is not the correct one. The one I gave is the correct one. (However your definition is equivalent to the correct one if $G$ is finite.)
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:38










          • Thank you, Keith. I understand. But in the mentioned problem we have that $<sigma>$ acts faithfully on the set $lambda_i cup lambda_j$ equal to the union of TWO orbits. And acts transitively on every orbit. So we can not argue that the action is faithfull on some orbit. Is not so?
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:43







          • 1




            No, see the example in my 4rth paragraph. A cyclic group can act faithfully on the union of two orbits without acting faithfully on either one.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:45












          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          2
          down vote



          accepted






          Let me correct some definitions.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is faithful if the only element of $G$ that fixes all points of $X$ is the identity element, $1in G$.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is regular if the action is transitive and the only element of $G$ that fixes at least one point of $X$ is $1in G$.



          It is not true that a faithful action of an abelian group is regular. For example, is $sigma = (1;2)(3;4;5)$, then $G=langle sigmarangle$ acts faithfully but not regularly on $X = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5$.



          What is true is that, if $G$ is abelian, any faithful transitive action is regular. For this you must show that if $G$ acts transitively on $X$ and $gin G$ has at least one fixed point in $X$, then it fixes all elements of $X$. The argument goes like this: if $gx_0=x_0$ for some $x_0in X$, then for any $hin G$ we have $g(hx_0)=h(gx_0)=hx_0$, so $hx_0$ is a fixed point of $g$. Thus $g$ sixes all points of $Gx_0=X$. Thus it is reasonable to say that a faithful orbit of an abelian group is regular.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          Let me correct some definitions.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is faithful if the only element of $G$ that fixes all points of $X$ is the identity element, $1in G$.



          The action of $G$ on $X$ is regular if the action is transitive and the only element of $G$ that fixes at least one point of $X$ is $1in G$.



          It is not true that a faithful action of an abelian group is regular. For example, is $sigma = (1;2)(3;4;5)$, then $G=langle sigmarangle$ acts faithfully but not regularly on $X = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5$.



          What is true is that, if $G$ is abelian, any faithful transitive action is regular. For this you must show that if $G$ acts transitively on $X$ and $gin G$ has at least one fixed point in $X$, then it fixes all elements of $X$. The argument goes like this: if $gx_0=x_0$ for some $x_0in X$, then for any $hin G$ we have $g(hx_0)=h(gx_0)=hx_0$, so $hx_0$ is a fixed point of $g$. Thus $g$ sixes all points of $Gx_0=X$. Thus it is reasonable to say that a faithful orbit of an abelian group is regular.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Jan 8 at 8:27

























          answered Jan 8 at 8:23









          Keith Kearnes

          5,1641626




          5,1641626











          • Thank you, Keith. But we don't speak about regular action. We want to find regular orbit of action. And following M.Isaacs book Finite Group Theory this is orbit with the size equal to the acting group.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:27






          • 1




            Try to look at it from the perspective of the regular orbit. The orbit doesn't know that the rest of the set exists, and the group action is not gonna tell it that: the group just maps the orbit into itself. So from the orbit's perspective, the action on the group on it IS a regular action.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:31






          • 1




            @MikhailGoltvanitsa: I am traveling and don't have Isaac's book with me, but the definition you are using for "regular" is not the correct one. The one I gave is the correct one. (However your definition is equivalent to the correct one if $G$ is finite.)
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:38










          • Thank you, Keith. I understand. But in the mentioned problem we have that $<sigma>$ acts faithfully on the set $lambda_i cup lambda_j$ equal to the union of TWO orbits. And acts transitively on every orbit. So we can not argue that the action is faithfull on some orbit. Is not so?
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:43







          • 1




            No, see the example in my 4rth paragraph. A cyclic group can act faithfully on the union of two orbits without acting faithfully on either one.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:45
















          • Thank you, Keith. But we don't speak about regular action. We want to find regular orbit of action. And following M.Isaacs book Finite Group Theory this is orbit with the size equal to the acting group.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:27






          • 1




            Try to look at it from the perspective of the regular orbit. The orbit doesn't know that the rest of the set exists, and the group action is not gonna tell it that: the group just maps the orbit into itself. So from the orbit's perspective, the action on the group on it IS a regular action.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:31






          • 1




            @MikhailGoltvanitsa: I am traveling and don't have Isaac's book with me, but the definition you are using for "regular" is not the correct one. The one I gave is the correct one. (However your definition is equivalent to the correct one if $G$ is finite.)
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:38










          • Thank you, Keith. I understand. But in the mentioned problem we have that $<sigma>$ acts faithfully on the set $lambda_i cup lambda_j$ equal to the union of TWO orbits. And acts transitively on every orbit. So we can not argue that the action is faithfull on some orbit. Is not so?
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:43







          • 1




            No, see the example in my 4rth paragraph. A cyclic group can act faithfully on the union of two orbits without acting faithfully on either one.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:45















          Thank you, Keith. But we don't speak about regular action. We want to find regular orbit of action. And following M.Isaacs book Finite Group Theory this is orbit with the size equal to the acting group.
          – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
          Jan 8 at 8:27




          Thank you, Keith. But we don't speak about regular action. We want to find regular orbit of action. And following M.Isaacs book Finite Group Theory this is orbit with the size equal to the acting group.
          – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
          Jan 8 at 8:27




          1




          1




          Try to look at it from the perspective of the regular orbit. The orbit doesn't know that the rest of the set exists, and the group action is not gonna tell it that: the group just maps the orbit into itself. So from the orbit's perspective, the action on the group on it IS a regular action.
          – Vincent
          Jan 8 at 8:31




          Try to look at it from the perspective of the regular orbit. The orbit doesn't know that the rest of the set exists, and the group action is not gonna tell it that: the group just maps the orbit into itself. So from the orbit's perspective, the action on the group on it IS a regular action.
          – Vincent
          Jan 8 at 8:31




          1




          1




          @MikhailGoltvanitsa: I am traveling and don't have Isaac's book with me, but the definition you are using for "regular" is not the correct one. The one I gave is the correct one. (However your definition is equivalent to the correct one if $G$ is finite.)
          – Keith Kearnes
          Jan 8 at 8:38




          @MikhailGoltvanitsa: I am traveling and don't have Isaac's book with me, but the definition you are using for "regular" is not the correct one. The one I gave is the correct one. (However your definition is equivalent to the correct one if $G$ is finite.)
          – Keith Kearnes
          Jan 8 at 8:38












          Thank you, Keith. I understand. But in the mentioned problem we have that $<sigma>$ acts faithfully on the set $lambda_i cup lambda_j$ equal to the union of TWO orbits. And acts transitively on every orbit. So we can not argue that the action is faithfull on some orbit. Is not so?
          – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
          Jan 8 at 8:43





          Thank you, Keith. I understand. But in the mentioned problem we have that $<sigma>$ acts faithfully on the set $lambda_i cup lambda_j$ equal to the union of TWO orbits. And acts transitively on every orbit. So we can not argue that the action is faithfull on some orbit. Is not so?
          – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
          Jan 8 at 8:43





          1




          1




          No, see the example in my 4rth paragraph. A cyclic group can act faithfully on the union of two orbits without acting faithfully on either one.
          – Keith Kearnes
          Jan 8 at 8:45




          No, see the example in my 4rth paragraph. A cyclic group can act faithfully on the union of two orbits without acting faithfully on either one.
          – Keith Kearnes
          Jan 8 at 8:45










          up vote
          2
          down vote













          More of a long comment actually:



          This is not true. Consider the subgroup $(1 2), (3 4), (1 2)(3 4) subset S_4$, which is isomorphic to the Klein four group. It is abelian and acts faithfully on the set $1, 2, 3, 4$ of four elements but does not have a regular orbit. I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic, but we have to think a bit more about if and how that would give us the desired property.



          UPDATE: It seems that the 'other post' I am referring to has since been deleted. Is that correct? Otherwise my post doesn't make much sense.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • "I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic" -- No. The problem is that the other post is not correct. If you look at my 4rth paragraph you will see that a cyclic group can act faithfully but not regularly.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:43











          • Yes I noticed. I had forgotten about how products of two cyclic groups can nevertheless be cyclic again themselves.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:45






          • 1




            Thank you very much, Vincent.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:50














          up vote
          2
          down vote













          More of a long comment actually:



          This is not true. Consider the subgroup $(1 2), (3 4), (1 2)(3 4) subset S_4$, which is isomorphic to the Klein four group. It is abelian and acts faithfully on the set $1, 2, 3, 4$ of four elements but does not have a regular orbit. I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic, but we have to think a bit more about if and how that would give us the desired property.



          UPDATE: It seems that the 'other post' I am referring to has since been deleted. Is that correct? Otherwise my post doesn't make much sense.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • "I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic" -- No. The problem is that the other post is not correct. If you look at my 4rth paragraph you will see that a cyclic group can act faithfully but not regularly.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:43











          • Yes I noticed. I had forgotten about how products of two cyclic groups can nevertheless be cyclic again themselves.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:45






          • 1




            Thank you very much, Vincent.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:50












          up vote
          2
          down vote










          up vote
          2
          down vote









          More of a long comment actually:



          This is not true. Consider the subgroup $(1 2), (3 4), (1 2)(3 4) subset S_4$, which is isomorphic to the Klein four group. It is abelian and acts faithfully on the set $1, 2, 3, 4$ of four elements but does not have a regular orbit. I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic, but we have to think a bit more about if and how that would give us the desired property.



          UPDATE: It seems that the 'other post' I am referring to has since been deleted. Is that correct? Otherwise my post doesn't make much sense.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          More of a long comment actually:



          This is not true. Consider the subgroup $(1 2), (3 4), (1 2)(3 4) subset S_4$, which is isomorphic to the Klein four group. It is abelian and acts faithfully on the set $1, 2, 3, 4$ of four elements but does not have a regular orbit. I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic, but we have to think a bit more about if and how that would give us the desired property.



          UPDATE: It seems that the 'other post' I am referring to has since been deleted. Is that correct? Otherwise my post doesn't make much sense.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Aug 13 at 8:42

























          answered Jan 8 at 8:18









          Vincent

          3,3071127




          3,3071127











          • "I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic" -- No. The problem is that the other post is not correct. If you look at my 4rth paragraph you will see that a cyclic group can act faithfully but not regularly.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:43











          • Yes I noticed. I had forgotten about how products of two cyclic groups can nevertheless be cyclic again themselves.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:45






          • 1




            Thank you very much, Vincent.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:50
















          • "I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic" -- No. The problem is that the other post is not correct. If you look at my 4rth paragraph you will see that a cyclic group can act faithfully but not regularly.
            – Keith Kearnes
            Jan 8 at 8:43











          • Yes I noticed. I had forgotten about how products of two cyclic groups can nevertheless be cyclic again themselves.
            – Vincent
            Jan 8 at 8:45






          • 1




            Thank you very much, Vincent.
            – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
            Jan 8 at 8:50















          "I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic" -- No. The problem is that the other post is not correct. If you look at my 4rth paragraph you will see that a cyclic group can act faithfully but not regularly.
          – Keith Kearnes
          Jan 8 at 8:43





          "I think the other post explicitly uses that the group under consideration is not just abelian but also cyclic" -- No. The problem is that the other post is not correct. If you look at my 4rth paragraph you will see that a cyclic group can act faithfully but not regularly.
          – Keith Kearnes
          Jan 8 at 8:43













          Yes I noticed. I had forgotten about how products of two cyclic groups can nevertheless be cyclic again themselves.
          – Vincent
          Jan 8 at 8:45




          Yes I noticed. I had forgotten about how products of two cyclic groups can nevertheless be cyclic again themselves.
          – Vincent
          Jan 8 at 8:45




          1




          1




          Thank you very much, Vincent.
          – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
          Jan 8 at 8:50




          Thank you very much, Vincent.
          – Mikhail Goltvanitsa
          Jan 8 at 8:50












           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


























           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2596566%2fdoes-faithfull-action-of-abelian-group-always-has-regular-orbit%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest













































































          這個網誌中的熱門文章

          How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

          Mutual Information Always Non-negative

          Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?