20) ( 30,-20)

(39,2)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (39,-2)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,18)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,-18)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (33,18)[(3,-2)[24.5]{}]{} (33,-18)[(3,2)[24.5]{}]{} (2.3,-1.4)[(3,-2)[25.6]{}]{} (2.3,1.4)[(3,2)[25.6]{}]{}

(15,14)[(0,0)[$P$]{}]{} (15,-14)[(0,0)[$p$]{}]{} (45,14)[(0,0)[$S$]{}]{} (45,-14)[(0,0)[$s$]{}]{}

(21,9)[(0,0)[$Q$]{}]{} (21,-9)[(0,0)[$q$]{}]{} (39,9)[(0,0)[$R$]{}]{} (39,-9)[(0,0)[$r$]{}]{}

\[r index shift invariance\] Theorem \[t pairs commute simple\] requires showing that $g_Sh_S =
h_Sg_S$ for any $S \subset \{1,\ldots, N\}$ assuming certain relations. Though the proof via Theorem \[t pairs commute simple\] only shows this in the case $S = \{1,\ldots, N\}$, this easily shows $g_Sh_S =
h_Sg_S$ for general $S = \{s_1 < \cdots < s_m\}$: set $p_i = g_{s_i}$ and $q_i = h_{s_i}$; then $p_1,\ldots, p_m, q_1, \ldots, q_m$ satisfy the relations,, (with $p$, $q$, $m$ in place of $g$, $h$, $N$, respectively), and hence $p_m \cdots p_1 q_m \cdots q_1 = q_m \cdots q_1 p_m \cdots
p_1$.

Many other results in this paper require showing that $g_Sh_S =
h_Sg_S$ given certain relations. Just as above, we only show the case $S = \{1,\ldots, N\}$ since this easily implies the general case.

\[thm:group-the
20) (30,-20) 

 (39,2)[(-1,2)[8 ] { } ] { } (39,-2)[(-1,-2)[8 ] { } ] { } (29,18)[(-1,-2)[8 ] { } ] { } (29,-18)[(-1,2)[8 ] { } ] { } (33,18)[(3,-2)[24.5 ] { } ] { } (33,-18)[(3,2)[24.5 ] { } ] { } (2.3,-1.4)[(3,-2)[25.6 ] { } ] { } (2.3,1.4)[(3,2)[25.6 ] { } ] { } 

 (15,14)[(0,0)[$P$ ] { } ] { } (15,-14)[(0,0)[$p$ ] { } ] { } (45,14)[(0,0)[$S$ ] { } ] { } (45,-14)[(0,0)[$s$ ] { } ] { } 

 (21,9)[(0,0)[$Q$ ] { } ] { } (21,-9)[(0,0)[$q$ ] { } ] { } (39,9)[(0,0)[$R$ ] { } ] { } (39,-9)[(0,0)[$r$ ] { } ] { } 

 \[r index shift invariance\ ] Theorem   \[t pairs commute simple\ ] requires showing that $ g_Sh_S = 
 h_Sg_S$ for any $ south \subset \{1,\ldots, N\}$ assume certain relative. Though the validation via Theorem   \[t pairs commute simple\ ] only shows this in the case $ S = \{1,\ldots, N\}$, this well show $ g_Sh_S = 
 h_Sg_S$ for general $ S = \{s_1 < \cdots < s_m\}$: sic $ p_i = g_{s_i}$ and $ q_i = h_{s_i}$; then $ p_1,\ldots, p_m, q_1, \ldots, q_m$ satisfy the relations, , (with $ p$, $ q$, $ m$ in position of $ g$, $ h$, $ N$, respectively), and hence $ p_m \cdots p_1 q_m \cdots q_1 = q_m \cdots q_1 p_m \cdots 
 p_1$. 

 Many other solution in this newspaper require showing that $ g_Sh_S = 
 h_Sg_S$ given certain relations. merely as above, we only show the case $ S = \{1,\ldots, N\}$ since this well implies the general font. 

 \[thm: group - the
20) ( 30,-20)

(39,2)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (39,-2)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,18)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,-18)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (33,18)[(3,-2)[24.5]{}]{} (33,-18)[(3,2)[24.5]{}]{} (2.3,-1.4)[(3,-2)[25.6]{}]{} (2.3,1.4)[(3,2)[25.6]{}]{}

(15,14)[(0,0)[$P$]{}]{} (15,-14)[(0,0)[$p$]{}]{} (45,14)[(0,0)[$S$]{}]{} (45,-14)[(0,0)[$s$]{}]{}

(21,9)[(0,0)[$Q$]{}]{} (21,-9)[(0,0)[$q$]{}]{} (39,9)[(0,0)[$R$]{}]{} (39,-9)[(0,0)[$r$]{}]{}

\[r inaex shift invarnqnce\] Tieorem \[t pairs cummute simple\] requires showiig tyat $g_Wh_S =
h_Sg_S$ for any $S \subret \{1,\ldots, N\}$ assumung rertain relations. Though the pdlof rie Theorem \[t pairx commute vimple\] only shmwr chis in the case $S = \{1,\ldots, N\}$, this easyly shoes $g_Sh_S =
h_Sg_S$ for gentraj $S = \{s_1 < \cdots < s_m\}$: set $p_i = g_{s_i}$ and $q_i = g_{s_i}$; thei $p_1,\ldots, p_m, q_1, \lcots, q_m$ satisfy the relatilns,, (aith $p$, $q$, $m$ in placf of $g$, $h$, $N$, tsspqxtively), and fence $p_m \cdots p_1 q_m \cdkts q_1 = q_m \cdots q_1 p_m \cdots
p_1$.

Many othex results ib rhid paper requmre shjwing that $g_Sh_S =
h_Sg_S$ given vertain relatipns. Juwt as above, we only siow the case $S = \{1,\ldotf, N\}$ since tkis easily implies thw tenerdl cdse.

\[tfn:gruup-uhe
20) ( 30,-20) (39,2)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (39,-2)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,18)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,-18)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (2.3,-1.4)[(3,-2)[25.6]{}]{} (15,14)[(0,0)[$P$]{}]{} (15,-14)[(0,0)[$p$]{}]{} (45,-14)[(0,0)[$s$]{}]{} (21,9)[(0,0)[$Q$]{}]{} (21,-9)[(0,0)[$q$]{}]{} invariance\] \[t pairs commute requires showing that = h_Sg_S$ for any $S \subset N\}$ assuming certain relations. Though the proof via Theorem \[t pairs commute simple\] shows this in the case $S = \{1,\ldots, N\}$, this easily shows $g_Sh_S h_Sg_S$ general = < \cdots < s_m\}$: set $p_i = g_{s_i}$ and $q_i = h_{s_i}$; then $p_1,\ldots, p_m, q_1, q_m$ satisfy the relations,, (with $p$, $q$, $m$ place of $g$, $h$, respectively), and hence $p_m \cdots q_m q_1 = \cdots p_m p_1$. Many other in this paper require showing that $g_Sh_S = h_Sg_S$ given certain relations. Just as above, we only the case \{1,\ldots, N\}$ this implies general case. \[thm:group-the
20) ( 30,-20)

(39,2)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (39,-2)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,18)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,-18)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (33,18)[(3,-2)[24.5]{}]{} (33,-18)[(3,2)[24.5]{}]{} (2.3,-1.4)[(3,-2)[25.6]{}]{} (2.3,1.4)[(3,2)[25.6]{}]{}

(15,14)[(0,0)[$P$]{}]{} (15,-14)[(0,0)[$p$]{}]{} (45,14)[(0,0)[$S$]{}]{} (45,-14)[(0,0)[$s$]{}]{}

(21,9)[(0,0)[$Q$]{}]{} (21,-9)[(0,0)[$q$]{}]{} (39,9)[(0,0)[$R$]{}]{} (39,-9)[(0,0)[$r$]{}]{}

\[r index shift invariAnce\] TheoreM \[t paiRs cOmmUtE simPle\] rEquires showing THat $g_sh_S =
h_Sg_S$ for any $S \subset \{1,\ldOts, N\}$ aSsUMing CErTain rElationS. thOUGh tHe PrOof ViA thEorem \[T paIrs commUte simple\] oNly ShOws this in the CAsE $S = \{1,\ldots, N\}$, thIs eAsily shows $g_SH_S =
h_sg_S$ for GeNerAL $S = \{s_1 < \cdOts < S_m\}$: set $P_i = g_{s_i}$ aND $q_i = h_{s_i}$; Then $p_1,\ldotS, p_M, Q_1, \ldots, Q_M$ satisfY THe RelaTions,, (with $p$, $q$, $m$ in plaCE oF $G$, $h$, $N$, respectivelY), and heNcE $P_m \CDOts P_1 q_m \Cdots q_1 = q_m \cdOtS q_1 p_m \cDOts
p_1$.

ManY OtHER ResULts in this papeR require shoWIng That $g_SH_S =
H_Sg_s$ Given cErtaiN rELatIons. Just as aBove, We only shoW the caSE $S = \{1,\ldots, n\}$ Since thIs easiLy iMplIes tHE gEnEraL cASe.

\[tHM:gRouP-The
20) ( 30,-20)

(39,2)[(-1, 2)[8]{}]{}  (39, -2) [(- 1, -2)[ 8]{} ]{} (29,18)[(- 1 ,-2) [8]{}]{} (29,-18)[(-1, 2)[8] {} ] {} ( 3 3, 18)[( 3,-2)[2 4 .5 ] { }]{ }(3 3,- 18 ) [( 3,2)[ 24. 5]{}]{}  (2.3,-1.4 )[( 3, -2)[25.6]{}] { }(2.3,1.4)[ (3, 2)[25.6]{}]{ }
(15,14 )[ (0, 0 )[$P$ ]{} ]{} ( 15,-14 ) [(0,0) [$p$]{}]{ }( 45,14) [ (0,0)[$ S $ ]{ }]{}  (45,-14)[(0,0)[$ s $] { }]{}

(21,9)[( 0,0)[$ Q$ ] {} ] { } ( 21, -9)[(0,0)[ $q $]{}] { } (39,9 ) [( 0 , 0 )[$ R $]{}]{} (39,- 9)[(0,0)[$r $ ]{} ]{}

\ [r  in d ex shi ft in va r ian ce\] Theore m \[ t pairs c ommute simple\ ]  requir es sho win g t hat$ g_ Sh _S=h _Sg _ S$  fo r  an y $S \su bs et  \{1, \ldo t s , N\}$  as sumi ng ce rtain relatio ns.  Tho u ghthe p roofviaTh eorem  \[t p airsco mmute simple\]only  shows th isin  th ecase$ S = \{ 1,\ ldo ts, N\} $, this eas il y s ho ws $g_Sh_S =
h_Sg_ S$ f or  general  $S =\ {s _1 < \cdots  <  s_ m\}$ : set $ p_i=  g _{s_i}$and $q _ i=h_{s_i} $;  then$p _1, \ld ots,p _m,q_1, \ ldots, q _m$ s a tisfy the rela t ions,, (with$ p$ , $q $ , $m $ i n place of$g$, $h$,  $N$ ,  r esp e ctive ly),an d  h e nce $p_m \cdots p_1  q _m \cd ots q _1 = q_m \cdo ts q_1 p_m \ c dots
p_1 $.
M an y  other results  in t his paperr equire s howin g that $ g_Sh_S =h _ Sg_S$ gi ven  ce rta inr e la tions. Just a s abov e,  we onl y s how the  ca se$S= \ {1 ,\ldots,N\}$ sin ce  t hi seas ily i m plies th egen er alcase. 
\[thm :grou p-th e
20) (_30,-20)

(39,2)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (39,-2)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{}_(29,18)[(-1,-2)[8]{}]{} (29,-18)[(-1,2)[8]{}]{} (33,18)[(3,-2)[24.5]{}]{} (33,-18)[(3,2)[24.5]{}]{}_(2.3,-1.4)[(3,-2)[25.6]{}]{} (2.3,1.4)[(3,2)[25.6]{}]{}

(15,14)[(0,0)[$P$]{}]{}_(15,-14)[(0,0)[$p$]{}]{}_(45,14)[(0,0)[$S$]{}]{} (45,-14)[(0,0)[$s$]{}]{}

(21,9)[(0,0)[$Q$]{}]{}_(21,-9)[(0,0)[$q$]{}]{}_(39,9)[(0,0)[$R$]{}]{} (39,-9)[(0,0)[$r$]{}]{}

\[r index_shift invariance\] Theorem \[t_pairs commute simple\] requires_showing that $g_Sh_S_=
h_Sg_S$_for any $S \subset \{1,\ldots, N\}$ assuming certain relations. Though the proof via Theorem \[t_pairs_commute simple\]_only_shows_this in the case $S_= \{1,\ldots, N\}$, this easily_shows $g_Sh_S_=
h_Sg_S$ for general $S = \{s_1 < \cdots_<_s_m\}$: set $p_i_= g_{s_i}$ and $q_i = h_{s_i}$; then $p_1,\ldots, p_m,_q_1, \ldots, q_m$ satisfy the relations,,_(with $p$, $q$,_$m$_in_place of $g$, $h$,_$N$, respectively), and hence $p_m \cdots_p_1 q_m \cdots q_1 = q_m_\cdots q_1 p_m \cdots
p_1$.

Many other results in_this paper require showing that $g_Sh_S_=
h_Sg_S$ given certain relations. Just_as above,_we only show the case_$S = \{1,\ldots,_N\}$ since_this easily implies_the general case.

\[thm:group-the