Codex @codex  0

Use the coordinate conventionIn this convention the Heisenberg group over a prime field has the productThe subset $H=\{A(t,b,t):t,b\in {\mathbb{F}}_p\}$ is an Abelian subgroup of order $p^2$: the middle coordinate in a product is $b+b^{\prime }+t{t}^{\prime }$, which is symmetric in the factors. Also $A(t,b,t{)}^{-1}=A(-t,t^2-b,-t)$ lies in $H$. The map $A(a,b,c)\mapsto a-c$ is a surjective group homomorphism to the additive group of ${\mathbb{F}}_p$, with kernel of a group homomorphism $H$. Hence $H$ is a normal subgroup of subgroup index $p$, and its left cosets are exactly the level sets of $a-c$.

For odd $p$, an explicit group isomorphism from $H$ to the additive group ${\mathbb{F}}_p^2$ isThe term $t{t}^{\prime }$ in matrix multiplication cancels the cross term in $(t+t^{\prime }{)}^2/2$. Thus $H$ is an elementary abelian group, isomorphic to $C_p\times C_p$.

For a subgroup $H$ of a group $G$ and $g\in G$, the conjugate subgroup is the conjugate subsetIt is a subgroup because conjugation is a group automorphism. Restricting that group automorphism gives a group isomorphism from $H$ to $gH{g}^{-1}$, so conjugate subgroups have the same group order. This describes the same operations after moving their reference configuration. Conjugacy of subgroups is an equivalence relation. ^[ref]

For an equilateral triangle with vertices of a polygon labeled $1,2,3$ counterclockwise, its symmetry group is the symmetric group $S_3$, also the dihedral group of group order six. Let $r=(123)$ be the counterclockwise rotation through $120$ degrees, and let $s=(12)$ be the reflection fixing vertex of a polygon $3$. Products apply the rightmost permutation first. The cyclic subgroup $K=⟨s⟩=\{e,(12)\}$ contains the identity element and one reflection. Relabeling a transposition by conjugation givesThus the conjugation action moves $K$ among the three subgroups $⟨(12)⟩$, $⟨(23)⟩$, and $⟨(13)⟩$. Geometrically, the rotation moves the axis of the reflection to the next axis. Each reflection fixes a different vertex of a polygon, although group isomorphisms relate all three subgroups.

The normalizer tells when this change of reference leaves the subgroup unchanged. For any group $G$ and subgroup $H\le G$, there is a bijectionTwo choices $g,k$ give the same conjugate subgroup exactly when $k^{-1}g\in N_G(H)$. Consequently the index of a subgroup $[G:N_G(H)]$ counts the distinct conjugate subgroups, even for an infinite group. For a finite group the count is $|G|/|N_G(H)|$. These are cosets; they need not form a quotient group, since $N_G(H)$ need not be a normal subgroup of $G$. In the triangle example there are $6/2=3$ conjugate subgroups, while the cyclic subgroup $⟨r⟩$ has only one. ^[ref]

The finite cyclic group $C_4=\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}$ and the Klein four-group $V_4=C_2\times C_2$ are both abelian groups of order four. In $C_4$, composition is addition modulo four. In $V_4$, label the elements $00,01,10,11$ and add each coordinate modulo two. For example, $01+10=11$ and $11+11=00$.

The order of a group element is preserved by a group isomorphism: an equation $g^m=e$ holds exactly when its image satisfies the same equation. In $C_4$, both $1$ and $3$ have order four. In $V_4$, each nonidentity element has order two. Hence these groups are not isomorphic, despite having the same order of a finite group. No relabelling can repair this discrepancy.

For a geometric model of $V_4$, take the symmetries of a non-square rectangle: the identity element, reflection in its horizontal axis, reflection in its vertical axis, and rotation through $180^{\circ }$. The two reflections commute, and their composite is the half-turn. Every nonidentity motion is its own inverse element. This makes the two binary switches concrete: choosing whether to apply each reflection specifies all four motions. The case of abelian groups of prime-square order generalizes this distinction from $p=2$ to any prime $p$.

For positive integers $m,n$, two finite cyclic groups combine into one cyclic group precisely when their group orders are coprime:The reason is that both cyclic counters must return to their identity elements simultaneously. If $a,b$ are generators of a group for the two factors, the order of a direct-product element gives $\mathrm{ord}(a,b)=\mathrm{lcm}(m,n)$. The pair generates all $mn$ elements exactly when this least common multiple is $mn$.

For $C_2\times C_3$, repeated addition of $(1,1)$ visitsAll six pairs appear before the return, so $(1,1)$ is a generator. In contrast, in $C_2\times C_2$ the same step gives only $(0,0),(1,1),(0,0)$. Every nonidentity element has order of a group element two, so none can generate all four pairs. This is the Klein four-group; there is no group isomorphism to $C_4$ even though both have four elements.

For a brief proof of the converse, each component order of a group element divides the corresponding factor group order. Every pair's order therefore divides $\mathrm{lcm}(m,n)$. If $\gcd (m,n)>1$, this is smaller than $mn$, so no pair can generate the whole product. The Chinese remainder theorem gives the explicit isomorphism in the coprime case: $t\mathrm{mod}mn\mapsto (t\mathrm{mod}m,t\mathrm{mod}n)$.

Let $p:E\to X$ be a connected covering space, with $X$ path-connected and locally path-connected, and let $F=p^{-1}(x_0)$. Restriction to $F$ identifies the deck transformation group with the centralizer of the monodromy action of a covering space inside the symmetric group $\mathrm{Sym}(F)$.

A deck transformation commutes with lifting every based loop, so its restriction centralizes the monodromy action of a covering space. Conversely, let $\sigma$ be a permutation of $F$ that centralizes this action. Represent $e\in E$ as the endpoint of a lifted path $\gamma$ starting at $a\in F$, and send $e$ to the endpoint of the lift of $\gamma$ starting at $\sigma (a)$. Two such representations differ by a lifted based loop; commutation with its monodromy proves independence of the representation.

On a path-connected evenly covered neighborhood, this construction carries each sheet to a sheet by the corresponding local homeomorphism. It is therefore continuous. Applying the construction to ${\sigma }^{-1}$ gives its inverse, hence a deck transformation. Since $E$ is path-connected, a deck transformation is determined by one point, proving uniqueness and the asserted group isomorphism.

An endomorphism is a morphism $f:X\to X$: its source and target are the same object, with the same specified structure. For a group it is an operation-preserving group homomorphism back into that group; for a vector space it is a linear endomorphism; for a ring it is a ring endomorphism. A self-map must satisfy the chosen compatibility conditions to qualify. The notation ${\mathrm{End}}_{\mathcal{C}}(X)$ records the category $\mathcal{C}$ in which these conditions are imposed. See Riehl, Category Theory in Context, Definition 1.1.10 and the following paragraph.

An endomorphism can lose information or miss part of its target. On the additive integers, $d(k)=2k$ preserves addition and is injective, but is not surjective: no integer maps to $1$. On the vector space ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ over the real numbers, the linear endomorphism $P(x,y)=(x,0)$ loses the second coordinate, so it is neither injective nor surjective. Neither is an automorphism. The same doubling rule becomes a group isomorphism when its target is the additive even integers, as explained under isomorphism.

The finite cyclic group $C_6=\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$ offers a small example of information loss that can be drawn completely. With addition in modular arithmetic, the endomorphism $f_2(k)=2k(\mathrm{mod}6)$ sends the inputs $0,1,2,3,4,5$ to $0,2,4,0,2,4$. Its image of a group homomorphism is $\{0,2,4\}$ and its kernel of a group homomorphism is $\{0,3\}$. Each reached output has two inputs; the other three outputs are missed.

For an endomorphism of a group or ring with a finite underlying set, injectivity is equivalent to surjectivity by counting; either condition makes it an automorphism. The additive integers example shows why the finiteness assumption matters. A linear endomorphism of a finite-dimensional vector space also has equivalent injectivity and surjectivity, this time by the rank-nullity theorem even when its underlying set is infinite.

Self-maps can be iterated without changing the object: $f^2=f\circ f$, $f^3=f\circ f\circ f$, and so on. Composition in a category and the identity morphism make the endomorphisms of a fixed object in a locally small category into a monoid. This packages repeated compatible operations, including irreversible ones, into a single structure.

The general language has a documented historical milestone in the 1945 paper of Samuel Eilenberg and Saunders Mac Lane. They defined categories of objects and compatible maps, and distinguished maps admitting inverses within that category. Their examples included groups, vector spaces, and topological spaces. This gave a common framework for compatible self-maps and their invertible cases. See Eilenberg and Mac Lane, General Theory of Natural Equivalences, pp. 234 and 237–239.

A finite cyclic group of order $n$ is isomorphic to the additive group $C_n=\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$. The group isomorphism sends the congruence class of $k$ to $g^k$, where $g$ is a chosen generator of a group. For $n=6$, the identity element is $0$, $4+5=3$ modulo six, and the inverse element of $4$ is $2$.

One finite cyclic group can have several choices of generator of a group. Adding $1$ visits all six elements before returning to zero; adding $5$ also visits all six, in the reverse order. Adding $2$ reaches only $\{0,2,4\}$ from zero, and adding $3$ reaches only $\{0,3\}$. The following permutations of the six elements show what each repeated step can reach.

This gives a precise version of a familiar scheduling question: does a fixed step visit every position, or repeatedly miss some? The generators of a finite cyclic group are exactly the steps coprime to the total number of positions. Changing the step changes the orbit through the same underlying group; the diagram does not replace its group operation with a different one.

For a group homomorphism $\phi :G\to H$, the group isomorphism $g\ker \phi \mapsto \phi (g)$ givesThe group kernel records which inputs become indistinguishable, and the image records which outputs actually occur. The first isomorphism theorem says that identifying precisely those indistinguishable inputs gives a group isomorphic to the image. It is one of the general isomorphism theorems. ^[ref].

For example, reduction modulo three gives a surjective group homomorphism from the additive cyclic group $\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$ to $\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}$. Its group kernel is $\{0,3\}$. The three cosets $\{0,3\}$, $\{1,4\}$, and $\{2,5\}$ become the three outputs zero, one, and two, respectively. ThusThe quotient group diagram shows both the identification and the resulting operation. More generally, fibres of a group homomorphism are cosets of its kernel explains why this map is well-defined and injective; it is surjective onto the image by definition.

A group packages reversible operations together with a rule for composing them. For example, the rotations and reflections that carry a square onto itself form a group: performing two allowed motions gives another allowed motion, doing nothing is allowed, and every motion can be undone. The elements are the motions themselves, rather than the vertices they move. Labels in the figure track those vertices; they are markers, rather than extra decorations that the motions must preserve.

Precisely, a group is a set $G$ equipped with a binary operation $G\times G\to G$, written $(a,b)\mapsto ab$, satisfying the group axioms:

The group operation need not be ordinary numerical multiplication. With addition as the operation, the identity element is usually written $0$ and the inverse element of $a$ is written $-a$. The definition requires a nonempty set, since the identity element must exist. See McKernan's MIT lecture 1, Definition 1.1 for the axioms.

Why insist on associativity? It makes a string of operations unambiguous without specifying parentheses. For function composition, both $(fg)h$ and $f(gh)$ send $x$ to $f(g(h(x)))$. This fixes the order of execution while allowing regrouping. Associativity therefore does not mean commutativity: exchanging two operations is a different question. Ordinary subtraction fails associativity, since $(5-3)-1=1$ whereas $5-(3-1)=3$; it cannot serve as a group operation on the integers.

An inverse element makes reversal exact and equations solvable. In any group, $ax=b$ has the unique solution $x=a^{-1}b$, since $a^{-1}(ax)=(a^{-1}a)x=x$. Similarly, $xa=b$ has solution $x=b{a}^{-1}$. The side matters in a non-abelian group. Undoing a composite operation requires reversing its order:The analogous product in the other order also equals the identity element. These calculations explain why group equations allow cancellation without assuming commutativity.

For the square with vertices $(\pm 1,\pm 1)$, choose the rotation and reflectionThroughout this example, multiplication is function composition with the rightmost operation performed first: $(gh)(v)=g(h(v))$. Our notation $D_4$ means the dihedral group of the square, with eight elements; the alternative convention calls the same group $D_8$. Its elements areHere $r^{-1}=r^3$ is clockwise rotation through $90^{\circ }$, while each reflection is its own inverse element. There are exactly eight motions: the image of one vertex has four choices, and the image of an adjacent vertex has two choices; together these determine the motion. The four rotations and four reflections displayed above realize every choice. The vertex permutations give a concrete group action. The general polygon construction is discussed in Group Theory (v4.01) by James S. Milne (section 1.17).

Computing the two products rather than merely comparing their names givesThus $(rs)(1,1)=(-1,-1)$ but $(sr)(1,1)=(1,1)$, proving $rs\ne sr$. In fact $rs$ is reflection in the line $y=-x$, whereas $sr$ is reflection in $y=x$. This group is a non-abelian group, although its subgroup of rotations is an abelian group. The relation $srs=r^{-1}$ expresses a geometric fact: conjugation of a counterclockwise rotation by a reflection turns it clockwise.

A contrasting example is the cyclic group $\mathbb{Z}/4\mathbb{Z}$ under addition in modular arithmetic. Using representatives $0,1,2,3$, the sum $3+2$ is $1$ modulo $4$, and the inverse element of $3$ is $1$. Repeated addition of $1$ runs through $0,1,2,3,0$. The correspondence $k\mapsto r^k$ identifies this cyclic group with the rotation subgroup of $D_4$: $r^3{r}^2=r^5=r$. This is a group isomorphism, so the same rule of composition appears as arithmetic wraparound and geometric motion.

By comparison, $(\mathbb{Z},+)$ is an infinite cyclic group. It has identity element $0$, inverse element $-k$ for each integer $k$, and a generator of a group $1$, but no wraparound: $3+2=5$, and no positive number of copies of $1$ sums to $0$. Both examples are abelian groups. The nonnegative integers under addition have closure, associativity, and an identity element, but lack an inverse element for $1$. Reversibility is precisely what fails.

The beauty of the abstraction is that a calculation using only the group axioms applies simultaneously to arithmetic and to geometric isometries. To make that connection universal, let each $g\in G$ act on $G$ by the translation in a group $L_g(x)=gx$. Each $L_g$ is a bijection, with inverse $L_{g^{-1}}$, and $L_g{L}_h=L_{gh}$. Distinct elements give distinct maps because $L_g(e)=g$. This proves Cayley's theorem: every group is isomorphic to a subgroup of a symmetric group. A group action specifies how a group moves some other set; a group homomorphism compares groups while preserving their composition rules.

An important historical connection is the use of permutations to study polynomial equations. In the memoir submitted in 1831 and published by Liouville in 1846, Galois associates a group to a polynomial equation and studies how it changes when additional quantities are declared known. Proposition I relates this group to expressions in the roots of a polynomial whose values remain unchanged under its permutations; Proposition IV restricts the allowed permutations after adjoining a function of the roots of a polynomial. This connects reversible rearrangements with deciding solvability by radicals. See Galois's original memoir, pp. 417–433, especially Propositions I and IV; Liouville's introduction, p. 382.

A group automorphism is a bijective group homomorphism $\alpha :G\to G$. It preserves the group operation, the identity element, and inverse elements; its inverse is another group homomorphism. Thus it is a group isomorphism with identical source and target. These maps form the automorphism group $\mathrm{Aut}(G)$ under function composition.^[ref]

For the additive finite cyclic group $C_6$, take $f_5(k)=5k(\mathrm{mod}6)$. Its output list on $0,1,2,3,4,5$ is $0,5,4,3,2,1$, a permutation of all six elements. It preserves addition because $5(a+b)=5a+5b(\mathrm{mod}6)$, and applying it twice gives $25k=k(\mathrm{mod}6)$. Hence it is a group automorphism and its own inverse function. Compare the collapsing $f_2$ in the figure under endomorphism. The general criterion under endomorphism of a finite cyclic group says exactly when such a map is reversible: its multiplier must be coprime to the size of the finite cyclic group.

A permutation need not be a group automorphism, even if it fixes the identity element. Let $\pi$ exchange $1$ and $2$ in $C_6$ and fix $0,3,4,5$. It is a bijection, and $\pi (0)=0$, butThus it fails to preserve addition and is not even a group homomorphism. Reversibility alone does not preserve the group operation.

A group automorphism carries each cyclic subgroup onto the cyclic subgroup generated by the image of its defining element, preserving the order of a group element. In particular, it carries a generator of a group to another generator of a group. For $C_6$, the existing calculation of generators of a finite cyclic group leaves only the images $1$ and $5$ for $1$, so its automorphism group consists exactly of the identity function and $f_5$. This turns the problem of compatible relabeling into a much smaller choice than enumerating arbitrary permutations.

A group isomorphism is a bijective group homomorphism $\phi :G\to H$. It matches the entire group operation: $\phi (ab)=\phi (a)\phi (b)$, with each product taken in its own group. Its inverse is automatically a group homomorphism. A group automorphism is the special case $H=G$.^[ref]

The target is part of the claim. The doubling example under isomorphism is a group isomorphism $d:\mathbb{Z}\to 2\mathbb{Z}$, between the additive integers and the additive even integers. Exactly the same rule $d(k)=2k$, declared as $d:\mathbb{Z}\to \mathbb{Z}$, is an injective endomorphism that misses $1$ and every other odd integer, so is not a group automorphism. Changing the declared target changes surjectivity, even though it does not change the formula or its compatibility with addition.

An isomorphism lets a calculation in one model solve the same problem in another. The example under group identifies addition modulo four with function composition of rotations of a square via $k\mapsto r^k$. Through this group isomorphism, adding exponents corresponds exactly to composing motions. More generally, a group isomorphism preserves order of a group element, carries subgroups to subgroups, and carries a generating set of a group to a generating set of a group. Having equally many elements is insufficient: the permutation in group automorphism already fails compatibility on two inputs.

Why does the inverse preserve the group operation? Write $u=\phi (a)$ and $v=\phi (b)$, possible because of surjectivity. ThenThis proves the inverse condition directly. Analogous calculations work for each operation of a ring and for addition and scalar multiplication in a vector space. The argument relies on preserving those operations; it supplies no general continuity claim for the inverse of a continuous bijection between topological spaces.

Up to group isomorphism, the groups of order eight are $C_8$, $C_4\times C_2$, $C_2^3$, $D_8$ and $Q_8$, with $D_8$ here denoting the eight-element dihedral group. An element of order eight gives the first case. If every nonidentity element has order two the group is an elementary abelian group. Otherwise, after excluding elements of order eight, a cyclic subgroup of order four has index two; an element outside it either commutes with its generator or inverts it. In the latter case its square is either the identity or the central involution, giving the dihedral group or quaternion group.

Up to group isomorphism, the finite groups with at most six elements are the trivial group, the cyclic groups $C_2,C_3,C_4,C_5,C_6$, the Klein four-group $C_2\times C_2$, and the symmetric group $S_3$.

A group of prime cardinality is a cyclic group, since Lagrange's theorem forces any nonidentity element to generate it. For four elements, either an element has order of a group element four, or every nonidentity element is an involution. In the latter case the group of exponent two is abelian identity shows that two distinct nonidentity elements $a,b$ generate $\{e,a,b,ab\}\cong C_2\times C_2$.

For a group of order six, either an element generates it or some element $a$ has order of a group element three: otherwise all nonidentity elements would be involutions, producing a four-element subgroup in contradiction with Lagrange's theorem. Pairing each element with its inverse element gives an involution $b$ outside $⟨a⟩$. The subgroup $⟨a⟩$ has index of a subgroup two and is a normal subgroup, so $ba{b}^{-1}=a$ or $a^{-1}$. The commuting case makes $ab$ have order of a group element six, whereas the second case gives the multiplication rules of $S_3$ on the six distinct elements $a^i,a^{i}b$, $0\le i<3$.

All these groups embed in $S_4$ except $C_5$ and $C_6$. The former is excluded by Lagrange's theorem; the latter is excluded because the disjoint cycle decomposition of a permutation of four letters cannot have least common multiple of cycle lengths equal to six.

These are all the groups of group order $70$ up to group isomorphism, with $D_n$ denoting a dihedral group of order $n$. The Sylow theorems make the Sylow subgroups of orders five and seven unique: the possible counts divide fourteen and ten, respectively, and only one has the required residue. These normal subgroups of coprime order commute, giving a normal subgroup $N\cong C_{35}$. Cauchy's theorem for finite groups provides an element of order two outside $N$, so $G=N⋊C_2$.

The automorphism of a finite cyclic group defining this semidirect product is a unit $a$ modulo $35$ with $a^2\equiv 1$. The Chinese remainder theorem makes its restrictions modulo five and seven independently $+1$ or $-1$. The resulting exponents are $1,34,6,29$, giving the four displayed groups in order. Their center of a group orders are $70,1,5,7$, so no two are isomorphic. Every case exists as the specified semidirect product.

These invertible matrices, for $n\in \mathbb{Z}$, form an infinite cyclic group. The displayed multiplication rule, $B_0=I$, and $B_n^{-1}=B_{-n}$ give a group isomorphism from the additive group of integers via $n\mapsto B_n$. Its generator is $B_1$. The subgroups of an infinite cyclic group become $\{B_{mk}:k\in \mathbb{Z}\}$ for integers $m\ge 0$, and their subgroup indices are $m$ when $m>0$. The case $m=0$ is the trivial subgroup and has infinite index. As transformations, these matrices send $(x,y)$ to $(x+ny,y)$.

An internal direct product finds independent coordinates already present inside a group. Let $H,K$ be normal subgroups of $G$ withThen the multiplication mapis a group isomorphism. Thus every element of $G$ has a unique factorization into one element of each subgroup. Conversely, the embedded factors $G\times \{e_H\}$ and $\{e_G\}\times H$ inside an external direct product of groups satisfy these conditions.

For a concrete example, take the additive cyclic group $C_6=\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$ and its subgroups $H=\{0,3\}$ and $K=\{0,2,4\}$. They are normal subgroups because $C_6$ is an abelian group. Their intersection is $\{0\}$, and the sums $h+k$ give every residue class exactly once. For instance, $1=3+4\mathrm{mod}6$. The table makes the unique decomposition visible.

The proof explains each hypothesis. Normality puts the group commutator $[h,k]=h^{-1}{k}^{-1}hk$ in both $H$ and $K$, so it is the identity element. Therefore the factors commute, and $\Phi$ preserves the group operation. The condition $HK=G$ makes it surjective. If $hk=e$, then $h=k^{-1}$ belongs to the intersection, forcing both to be the identity element; thus its group kernel is trivial and it is injective.

Normality cannot simply be omitted. In the symmetric group $S_3$, take $H=⟨(123)⟩$ and $K=⟨(12)⟩$. Their intersection is trivial and $HK=S_3$, but $K$ is not a normal subgroup. With permutations composed right to left, $(123)(12)=(13)$ while $(12)(123)=(23)$, so the factors do not commute. The setwise decomposition is unique, but its multiplication map is not a group homomorphism from $H\times K$. An independent-coordinate interpretation requires the group operations to agree, not merely a bijection of the underlying sets.

An isomorphism is a morphism with a two-sided inverse that is also a morphism. Two objects are isomorphic when such a map exists between them. For groups, rings, and vector spaces, a bijective structure-preserving map has a structure-preserving inverse; in other settings the inverse condition needs separate attention, as for a homeomorphism between topological spaces.

For example, $f(k)=2k$ is a group isomorphism from the additive integers to the additive even integers. It is bijective onto that target, satisfies $f(a+b)=f(a)+f(b)$, and has inverse $2k\mapsto k$. The two groups have the same addition pattern even though they are different sets. It is not a ring isomorphism for their inherited multiplications, since $f(ab)=2ab$ while $f(a)f(b)=4ab$.

An isomorphism of Lie groups is a group isomorphism that is also a diffeomorphism. Both the homomorphism and its inverse preserve the smooth structures. Its identity differential is a Lie algebra isomorphism, but an isomorphism of Lie algebras determines a global Lie group isomorphism without extra period data only for connected simply connected groups.

Use the matrices of solution. Their projective classes satisfy $[-M]=[M]$, since $-I_2\in N$. The group homomorphism is therefore explicitlyThese four classes are distinct: the two diagonal representatives are not scalar multiples of one another, the two off-diagonal representatives are not scalar multiples of one another, and a diagonal representative cannot be a nonzero scalar multiple of an off-diagonal one.

Although $A$ and $B$ anticommute as matrices, their projective classes commute:Furthermore $[A{]}^2=[B{]}^2=[I_2]$ and $[C{]}^2=[-I_2]=[I_2]$. Thus every nonidentity element of the image has order two. An explicit group isomorphism to the Klein four-group isIndeed reordering products introduces only a sign, which disappears in the projective linear group, so this map turns multiplication into addition modulo two in each coordinate. Equivalently, $\ker \tilde{R}=G\cap N=\{\pm I_2\}$ and the first isomorphism theorem givesThis projective image of the square symmetry group illustrates how a noncommutative group can have an Abelian projective image: its scalar commutator becomes the identity class.

Put $r=g_1=\mathrm{diag}(\alpha ,{\alpha }^2)$ and $s=g_2$, using ${\alpha }^{\ast }={\alpha }^{-1}={\alpha }^2$. ThenEvery word can therefore be put in the form $r^k$ or $r^{k}s$, with $k=0,1,2$. These give six distinct matrices:The group isomorphism $r\mapsto (123)$, $s\mapsto (12)$ identifies this group with the symmetric group $S_3$, with permutations composed from right to left.

Conjugation by $s$ exchanges $r,r^2$. Conjugation by $r$ cycles $s,rs,r^{2}s$, because $r(r^{k}s)r^{-1}=r^{k+2}s$. Their conjugacy classes arewith sizes $1,2,3$. There is no mixing between them: their elements have orders one, three and two, respectively.