p4g in 4 letters and 8 relations
The presentation of p4g, derived from the group's own operations. The two translations commute; each conjugation relation is read off a column of a matrix; and the point group's relations are corrected by the translation they actually come back as, which is what makes this group an extension rather than a semidirect product. Every relator is evaluated where the group lives and must be the identity, and coset enumeration on the letters alone returns 8, which is the order of the point group.
4 essays call
presentation. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every
call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member
of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.
Every one of this site's 393 essays names its parameters at the
call site, which the standard pass of 2026-08-09 established and param-floor
holds.
Where it is called
Changing this generator changes every one of these figures.
A group in four letters
Every other essay here describes a symmetry group by what it does to the plane. There is a second description — a handful of letters and the words in them that are required to equal nothing — and it can be counted with no plane anywhere in the computation.
Telling two words apart
There are finitely presented groups in which no algorithm can decide whether two products of the generators are the same element. The seventeen are not among them, and the procedure that settles it is short enough to state in a sentence — which then makes it possible to measure how fast each group grows.
Every wall names a generator
The copies of a fundamental domain tile the plane and stand in one-to-one correspondence with the elements of the group. So the elements that carry the home copy across a wall generate everything — and the generators of a wallpaper group can be read off a picture rather than looked up.
The same group means the same pattern
Seventeen patterns is not the same statement as seventeen groups. Two patterns that look nothing alike could in principle have symmetry groups that are abstractly the same, and then the classification would be a classification of drawings. Bieberbach's theorem says they cannot — and the affine map that proves it can be recovered from the two operation sets alone.