From hoey@aic.nrl.navy.mil Wed Dec 29 17:43:47 1993 Return-Path: Received: from Sun0.AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/archive/cube-lovers id AA12501; Wed, 29 Dec 93 17:43:47 EST Received: by Sun0.AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA05575; Wed, 29 Dec 93 17:43:28 EST Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 17:43:28 EST From: hoey@aic.nrl.navy.mil (Dan Hoey) Message-Id: <9312292243.AA05575@Sun0.AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil> To: Cube-Lovers@life.ai.mit.edu Cc: Jerry Bryan Subject: Correction Re: Some Additional Distances in the Edge Group A couple of days ago, I said that proofs are a good idea. I'll say it again today with a redder face. Yesterday I discussed the edge group positions I = Solved, P = Pons Asinorum (or Mirror), E = All edges flipped, and PE = P E = Pons Asinorum with all edges flipped and the function from the edge group to 4-tuples of distances f(X)=(d(I,X), d(E,X), d(P,X), d(PE,X)). I wrote: ?? If f(X)=(a,b,c,d), then conjugation shows us that ?? ?? f(X E)=(b,a,d,c), f(X P)=(c,d,a,b), and F(X PE)=(d,c,b,a). ?? ?? So the set of quadruples has the symmetries of the rectangle. ?? The first sentence is incorrect, though the argument as a whole is reparable. First, I'll do what I should have done yesterday, and define the distance function d(X,Y). We want the minimum length process Z such that X Z = Y. But premultiplying both sides by X', we have Z = X' Y. So I define d(X,Y)=Length(X' Y). From the properties of the length function (Length(I)=0, Length(X)=Length(X'), and Length(X Y)<=Length(X) + Length(Y)) we can conclude that d(X,Y) is a metric. Suppose f(X)=(a,b,c,d). I claim f(E X)=(b,a,d,c), f(P X)=(c,d,a,b), and F(PE X)=(d,c,b,a). Proof: To show f(E X)=(b,a,d,c), first observe that I=I', E=E', and P E = E P. d(I,E X) = Length(I' E X) = Length(E' X) = d(E,X), so d(E,E X) = d(I, E E X) = d(I,X); d(P,E X) = Length(P' E X) = Length((PE)' X) = d(PE,X) so d(PE,E X)=d(P,E E X)=d(P,X). To show that f(P X)=(c,d,a,b), exchange P and E in the above argument. To show that f(PE X)=(d,c,b,a), use both occurrences of the argument. QED. So the idea of yesterday's message is correct, but I had X E, X P, and X PE instead of E X, P X, and PE X, respectively. I would show you a counterexample to yesterday's formulation, but it turns out there is none. I claim that f(X,E)=f(E,X), f(X,P)=f(P,X), and f(X,PE)=f(PE,X). Proof: Recall that E commutes with every element of the Rubik cube group, so f(X E)=f(E X). It turns out that ``up to M-conjugacy'', P commutes with every element of the edge group as well. For P performs a mirror-reflection of the edges, and so can be regarded as an element of M acting on the edge group. So P' X P = Xbar is an M-conjugate of X, and X P = P Xbar. Since Length(X) agrees on M-conjugates, so does d(X,Y), and so f(X), so f(X P)=f(P Xbar) = f(P X). Finally, f(X PE) = f(X P E) = f(E X P) = f(P E X) = f(PE X). QED. So it turns out it that the statement about f was true. But I am no less embarrassed for asserting it, for I had no reason to think it would be true. It's only rescued by the surprising commutativity of the Pons Asinorum. Finally, I would like to note something that I nearly included in yesterday's message, but yanked when I decided it was false: f(X')=f(X). Now I'll prove it: Proof: For W among {I,E,P,PE}, we have X W = W Xbar, for Xbar an M-conjugate of X. So d(X,W)=Length(X'W)=Length(W'Xbar')=Length(W'X')=d(W,X'). QED. Dan Hoey Hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil