# Intuitive description of the Burnside Lemma

The Burnside Lemma resembles it needs to have an instinctive description. Does any person have one?

You can promptly lower to the instance of a transitive activity, in which instance we simply intend to clarify why the complete variety of times that something obtains dealt with is specifically the dimension of the team. Yet in this instance every little thing is symmetrical in all factors in the (one-of-a-kind) orbit. So to count regularly something obtains dealt with, we can simply count the amount of times a certain x obtains dealt with, and also increase by the dimension of the orbit. Currently we've lowered to the reality that the dimension of an orbit is the index of the stabilizer.

As an instance, we take into consideration the variety of means of colouring a dice with $n$ colours with individuality approximately turning. We call each one-of-a-kind colouring where turnings are not permitted a fixed colouring and also each one-of-a-kind one where they are permitted a vibrant colouring. We specify the the set of orbits to be the (disjoint) fixed colourings that represent each vibrant colouring. We will certainly make use of turnings to suggest a turning that makes the dice inhabit the very same room, and also as being one-of-a-kind if it is an one-of-a-kind function from the dice to the dice. This consists of the identification turning. With ease, the lemma claims:

**Proposition 1. ** #Orbits * #Rotations = Sum for each and every turning $r$ of #static colourings unmodified by this turning

We will certainly currently take into consideration each orbit $O$ independently. Select a fixed colouring $c$ inside $O$. Intend 2 (perhaps equivalent) turnings $p$, $q$ offer the very same fixed colouring, $d$, when used on $c$. After that $p^{-1} q$ solutions $d$. In addition, intend $r$ (perhaps the identification) solutions $d$. $p^{-1} pr$ will certainly additionally deal with d. So $pr$ will certainly take $c$ to $d$. Given that $pr$ is various for each and every $r$, and also $p^{-1} q$ is various for each and every $q$, the mapping features are injective in both instructions and also there is a bijection in between the $q$ and also $r$ values.

So, for each and every $O$, the variety of turnings is the amount over each fixed colorings $x$ in $O$ times the variety of turnings generating $x$. This can be revised as the amount over each turning r of the variety of fixed colourings in $O$ dealt with by $r$ (as a result of the bijection in the previous paragraph). We get suggestion 1 by including over all $O$.

The basic evidence is fairly comparable to this, other than that it makes use of group theory.

Related questions