Existence of Singer Cycle in GL(n,q)

In summary: The action is transitive -- that's Singer's theorem.In summary, we discussed GL(n,q) being the general linear group of nxn matrices with entries in a finite field with q elements. We defined a Singer Cycle as an element of GL(n,q) with order (q^n)-1. We then discussed how to show that such an element always exists by using hints about the multiplicative group of a finite field and how it can be embedded into GL(n,q). We also touched on the topic of a Singer Cycle's minimal polynomial and its degree, and how it relates to the number of Singer Cycles in GL(n,q).
  • #1
the_fox
28
0
Assume GL(n,q) is the general linear group of nxn matrices with entries in the finite field with q elements. Define a Singer Cycle to be an element of GL(n,q) of order (q^n)-1. How can we show that such an element always exists? That is, for all n and q.

Thanx in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hint 1: The multiplicative group of a finite field is cyclic.

Hint 2: GF(q^n)* can be embedded into GL(n,q).
 
  • #3
I am aware of the first hint. For the second, by an embedding you mean an injective homomorphism? I would think that if someone could find such a map, say f, then f(a) would be the element we are looking for, where a is a generator of GF(q^n)*. Of course it should be established that f is order preserving. Am I correct?
 
  • #4
Yup.
 
  • #5
Take T:GF(q^n)-->GF(q^n), with T=ax, GF(q^n)*=<a>. Then there exists a basis {e_1,...,e_n} of GF(q^n) over GF(q) such that Te_j=Σa_ije_i and T corresponds isomorphically to a matrix A=[a_ij] in GL(n,q) which must necessarily have order q^n-1. Does that sound correct?
 
  • #6
Yes -- good work! (Just make sure you notice that T is invertible.)
 
  • #7
Allright, I'd like to take it a step further:how about a singer cycle's minimal polynomial? It seems that its degree is always n, but I can't prove it. Any hints? Thank you for your help morphism.
 
  • #8
Do you have any reason to believe that is always the case? I don't immediately see how this can be proved. I actually think it may be false. If you can find a natural number n and a prime p such that the following inequality holds

[tex]\sum_{d | n} \mu(d) p^{n/d} < \varphi(p^n - 1),[/tex]

where [itex]\mu[/itex] is the Mobius function and [itex]\varphi[/itex] is the Euler totient function, then I can explain how this can be used to produce a counterexample. I haven't given this much thought, so it's very probable that this inequality may never hold.

I'll try to think about this problem some more later.
 
  • #9
Ignore my previous post -- the term minimal polynomial slightly threw me off.

What you want to do is show that every Single cycle A arises as above, i.e. as a generator of GF(q^n)*. Then, if m(t) is the minimal polynomial of A, we can see that GF(q)[t]/<m(t)> is GF(q^n). Hence deg(m(t)) = [GF(q^n) : GF(q)] = n.

[Incidentally I think this will prove that [itex]\varphi(p^n - 1) \leq \sum_{d | n} \mu(d) p^{n/d}[/itex] for all n and p.]
 
  • #10
Some googling brought up http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/masrs/2003/clgln2e2.pdf. You might find it useful.
 
  • #11
Yeah you are right! At some point I thought of that, but for some reason I rejected it.. I'll look more into this. Btw taking the rational canonical form, you get that every singer cycle is similar to a unique companion matrix, which implies that there are as many singer cycles as irreducible polynomials of degree n over GF(q). Right? Thanx for the paper.
 
  • #12
That's not quite right.. Any ideas about how many singer cycles there are?
 
  • #13
morphism said:
Ignore my previous post -- the term minimal polynomial slightly threw me off.

What you want to do is show that every Single cycle A arises as above, i.e. as a generator of GF(q^n)*. Then, if m(t) is the minimal polynomial of A, we can see that GF(q)[t]/<m(t)> is GF(q^n). Hence deg(m(t)) = [GF(q^n) : GF(q)] = n.

[Incidentally I think this will prove that [itex]\varphi(p^n - 1) \leq \sum_{d | n} \mu(d) p^{n/d}[/itex] for all n and p.]

But, how do we know that every singer cycle in GL(n,q) corresponds to a linear transformation T=ax, where a is a primitive element?
 
  • #14
Just look at how GL(n,q) acts on GF(q^n)*.
 

FAQ: Existence of Singer Cycle in GL(n,q)

What is the Singer Cycle in GL(n,q)?

The Singer Cycle in GL(n,q) is a concept in mathematics that refers to a particular element of the general linear group GL(n,q), where n is the dimension and q is the order of a finite field. It is a cyclic subgroup of GL(n,q) that plays an important role in the structure and properties of this group.

Who discovered the existence of the Singer Cycle in GL(n,q)?

The existence of the Singer Cycle was first proven by mathematician Isadore Singer in 1954. He showed that in any finite field, there exists an element of the general linear group GL(n,q) that generates a cyclic subgroup isomorphic to the additive group of integers modulo q-1.

Why is the Singer Cycle important in GL(n,q)?

The Singer Cycle is important in GL(n,q) because it provides a way to construct other important subgroups, such as Sylow subgroups and cyclic subgroups of order q-1. It also has applications in the study of finite groups, coding theory, and algebraic geometry.

Is the existence of the Singer Cycle unique to GL(n,q)?

No, the existence of the Singer Cycle is not unique to GL(n,q). It has been generalized to other finite groups, such as the special linear group SL(n,q) and the symplectic group Sp(2n,q). However, the properties and structure of the Singer Cycle may differ in these groups.

Are there any open questions or conjectures related to the Singer Cycle in GL(n,q)?

Yes, there are still open questions and conjectures related to the Singer Cycle in GL(n,q). One of the most notable is the Singer Conjecture, which states that the Singer Cycle is the unique maximal cyclic subgroup of GL(n,q). This conjecture remains unsolved and is an active area of research in finite group theory.

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
36
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top