Timeline for Can the difference of non-conjugate pseudoreflections lie in the commutator subgroup?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2014 at 18:00 | history | edited | Stephen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 736 characters in body
|
| May 6, 2014 at 17:55 | comment | added | Stephen | You're welcome! I'm adding a little paragraph towards your comment. | |
| May 6, 2014 at 3:27 | vote | accept | Anton Geraschenko | ||
| May 6, 2014 at 3:27 | comment | added | Anton Geraschenko | Awesome! As it happens, the reason I wanted to understand the abelianization of $G$ was exactly to argue that there's one such $f$ for each conjugacy class of reflection, and that there's this nice segregation where each reflection acts non-trivially on exactly one of the $f$'s. But I'd managed to get myself muddled up. Thanks! | |
| May 6, 2014 at 3:21 | review | First posts | |||
| May 6, 2014 at 3:34 | |||||
| May 6, 2014 at 3:06 | history | answered | Stephen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |