Timeline for Can the difference of non-conjugate pseudoreflections lie in the commutator subgroup?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:19 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 6, 2014 at 3:27 | vote | accept | Anton Geraschenko | ||
| May 6, 2014 at 3:06 | answer | added | Stephen | timeline score: 11 | |
| May 6, 2014 at 1:51 | comment | added | Geoff Robinson | Note that if they are identified in the Abelianization, then they must at least have the same order (on consideration of determinant), as they are pseudoreflections. | |
| May 6, 2014 at 0:49 | answer | added | David E Speyer | timeline score: 7 | |
| May 6, 2014 at 0:23 | comment | added | Peter Samuelson | Here's a not-very-satisfying thought: Shephard and Todd classified complex reflection groups, and other than 26 or so exceptional groups, all are of the form $G(m,n,p)$ (which is defined on Wikipedia). Maybe your question can be answered by brute force in this case? | |
| May 5, 2014 at 22:40 | history | asked | Anton Geraschenko | CC BY-SA 3.0 |