On 12/07/94 at 20:45:00 Martin Schoenert said:

But C is not the largest such group. The largest such group is M, i.e.,
the full group of symmetries of the entire cube. This is the reason why
I prefer to view G as a subgroup of MG, which is the semidirekt product
of M and G, even though I realize that MG is not physically realizable.

But can't you speak of conjugates such as m'gm without regard to G
being a subgroup of MG? I agree that MG seems like a very useful group,
and it is a very nice model of what is going on. But doesn't g in G
imply m'gm in G whether I ever heard of MG or not?

 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Robert G. Bryan (Jerry Bryan)                        (304) 293-5192
Associate Director, WVNET                            (304) 293-5540 fax
837 Chestnut Ridge Road                              BRYAN@WVNVM
Morgantown, WV 26505                                 BRYAN@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU