Cayley Graphs
Arthur Cayley
August 16, 1821-January 26, 1895
Abstract Definitions and Concrete Pictures
Robert “Dr. Bob” Gardner
ETSU Abstract Algebra Club
Fall 2024
Primary References
Introduction to Modern Algebra 1 and 2
Intro. Modern Algebra (Maybe)
Graph Theory 1 and 2
Graph Theory Supplement
Niccolò Tartaglia (1500-1557) and Ludovico Ferrari (1522-1565)
The Early History of Group Concepts 1
Joseph-Louis Lagrange, in the early 1770s set out to understand why equations of third and fourth degree equations have formulas for solutions. He realized that a “key object” in the reason was the group of permutations of the roots.
Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736-1813)
The Early History of Group Concepts 2
In 1799, Paola Ruffini gave a several hundred page “proof” of the impossibility of solving a 5th degree polynomial (and higher) with an algebraic formula. Unfortunately, gaps have been found in Ruffini’s proof (though his result is correct).
Paolo Ruffini (1765-1822)
He was the first to explore several group theory results in the setting of permutation groups, including the order of an element, conjugacy, and cycle decomposition of permutations. He did not define a group (or even a permutation group).
Abel and the (Algebraic) Unsolvability of the Quintic
Groups (rings and fields) became part of algebra in the 19th century. While look-ing for an algebraic formula for the zeros of an nth degree polynomial, Abel showed that there is not (in general) an algebraic solution to a 5th degree (or higher) polynomial equation. These conditions involved permutations of the zeros of the polynomial and a key part of his proof is based on commutativity (that’s why we call commutative groups “Abelian”).
Niels Henrik Abel
(1802-1829)
Galois and the Classification of Solvable Equations
Evariste Galois
(1811-1832)
Galois gave conditions for the existence of an algebraic solution of a general nth degree polynomial equation (the condition is that the Galois group of the equation must be “solvable”). The permutations of the zeros of a polynomial in the study of algebraic equations led in the 19th century to the more abstract study of groups in general and permutation groups in particular.
Cayley Defines a “Group”
Arthur Cayley gave the first definition of a group in 1854.
(page 41)
The Early History of Group Theory
In his 1854 paper, Cayley gave tables for several groups and described groups of matrices. He described groups of orders 4, 6, 18, and 27.
The first two complete Cayley Tables ever published
Definition of Group
Examples of Groups
Cayley Explores a Group Theory Problem
Cayley published two papers on group theory in 1878. These were follow-ups to his 1854 paper.
A. Cayley, Desiderata and Suggestions: No. 1. The Theory of Groups, American Journal of Mathematics, 1(1), 50-52 (1878)
A. Cayley, Desiderata and Suggestions: No. 2. The Theory of Groups: Graphical Representation, American Journal of Mathematics, 1(2), 174-176 (1878).
Cayley Introduces Cayley Graphs/Digraphs
But what does this mean?
Fraleigh Discusses Cayley Digraphs
Fraleigh uses arcs (and edges) to represent MULTIPLICATION ON THE RIGHT!
A Standard Here:
Gallian’s Definition of a Cayley Digraphs
Gallian uses arcs (and edges) to represent MULTIPLICATION ON THE RIGHT!
1
2
3
Permutations
Permutations
1
3
2
Permutations
1
3
2
Permutations
1
3
2
We find that the multiplication table for the group of symmetries of an equilateral triangle is:
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Notice that it contains a subgroup or order 3.
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Writing Elements in terms of Generators
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Bondy and Murty Define Cayley Graphs in an Exercise
Bondy and Murty use edges to represent MULTIPLICATION ON THE LEFT!
Godsil and Royle’s Definition of a Cayley Graph
Godsil and Royle use edges to represent MULTIPLICATION ON THE LEFT!
A Cayley Graph
Godsil and Royle’s Definition of a Cayley Digraph
Godsil and Royle use edges and arcs to represent MULTIPLICATION ON THE LEFT!
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Notice that this Cayley Digraph is different from the previous one!
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Remember Cayley’s Original Digraph?
A. Cayley, Desiderata and Suggestions: No. 2. The Theory of Groups: Graphical Representation, American Journal of Mathematics, 1(2), 174-176 (1878).
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Based on Schaum’s Outline of Theory and Problems of Group Theory by Benjamin Baumslag and Bruce Chandler, NY: McGraw-Hill (1968).
Back to Cayley’s Second 1878 Paper
A Cleaner Drawing of the First Cayley Digraph
A. Cayley, Desiderata and Suggestions: No. 2. The Theory of Groups: Graphical Representation, American Journal of Mathematics, 1(2), 174-176 (1878).
Theorem 1 “Picture Proof”
…
Theorem 1 “Picture Proof” (continued)
…
What Can a Group Tell us about a Cayley Graph?
Can We Recognize a Graph as a Cayley Graph?
So a graph that does not contain a Hamiltonian path is not a Cayley graph of a finite abelian group.
Definition. A Hamiltonian path in a graph is a path (i.e., a sequence of consecutively adjacent distinct vertices) that includes all vertices of the graph.
A Cayley Graph Isomorphism Result
Theorem 5. Every finite group is the automorphism group of some finite graph.
Some Graph Automorphism Results
Definition. An automorphism of a graph is an isomorphism of a graph with itself.
Theorem 5 is due to Robert Frucht (1939), and the proof is based a Cayley graph of the given group!
Theorem 5. Every finite group is the automorphism group of some finite graph.
Some Graph Automorphism Results 2
Wait! EVERY FINITE GROUP?
That means we can draw PICTURES of groups!!! I pictures…
…with some “additions”
Based on “Automorphism Group of Graphs (Supplemental Material for Intro to Graph Theory),” R.B. Beeler (2018).
Conclusion
References and Sources
Websites
References and Sources
Books
Happy Halloween!
The ending slide from Young Frankenstein (Mel Brooks, 1974)