Every nonabelian group of order 6 has a non-normal subgroup of order 2 (revisited)
I am fully aware that this question has already been addressed here and here. The question, however, derives from a Dummit and Foote exercise (section 4.2 exercise 10 page 122) and the answers provided make use of material that appears later in the book, or, at least, I do not clearly understand them in terms of the material that I have studied already.
So, I would like to submit the following tentative proof
'from first principles' (i.e. Dummit and Foote before page 122). As I feel insecure about it, I would be grateful if you could check it.
Consider a nonabelian group G of order 6. By Cauchy's theorem, the group contains at least one element of order 2, and therefore at least one subgroup of order 2. Suppose this/these subgroups are all normal. This would imply that all elements of order 2 commute with all elements of G.
The remaining elements of group G are of order 1 (which trivially is in the center of G), or order 3 (order 6 would imply the group is cyclic and therefore abelian). Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will also be in the center of G.
Therefore, G would be abelian, contrary to the assumption. So, at least one of the subgroups of order 2 should be non-normal.
abstract-algebra group-theory
add a comment |
I am fully aware that this question has already been addressed here and here. The question, however, derives from a Dummit and Foote exercise (section 4.2 exercise 10 page 122) and the answers provided make use of material that appears later in the book, or, at least, I do not clearly understand them in terms of the material that I have studied already.
So, I would like to submit the following tentative proof
'from first principles' (i.e. Dummit and Foote before page 122). As I feel insecure about it, I would be grateful if you could check it.
Consider a nonabelian group G of order 6. By Cauchy's theorem, the group contains at least one element of order 2, and therefore at least one subgroup of order 2. Suppose this/these subgroups are all normal. This would imply that all elements of order 2 commute with all elements of G.
The remaining elements of group G are of order 1 (which trivially is in the center of G), or order 3 (order 6 would imply the group is cyclic and therefore abelian). Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will also be in the center of G.
Therefore, G would be abelian, contrary to the assumption. So, at least one of the subgroups of order 2 should be non-normal.
abstract-algebra group-theory
Can you justify this sentence: 'Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will be also in the center.'
– Berci
43 mins ago
add a comment |
I am fully aware that this question has already been addressed here and here. The question, however, derives from a Dummit and Foote exercise (section 4.2 exercise 10 page 122) and the answers provided make use of material that appears later in the book, or, at least, I do not clearly understand them in terms of the material that I have studied already.
So, I would like to submit the following tentative proof
'from first principles' (i.e. Dummit and Foote before page 122). As I feel insecure about it, I would be grateful if you could check it.
Consider a nonabelian group G of order 6. By Cauchy's theorem, the group contains at least one element of order 2, and therefore at least one subgroup of order 2. Suppose this/these subgroups are all normal. This would imply that all elements of order 2 commute with all elements of G.
The remaining elements of group G are of order 1 (which trivially is in the center of G), or order 3 (order 6 would imply the group is cyclic and therefore abelian). Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will also be in the center of G.
Therefore, G would be abelian, contrary to the assumption. So, at least one of the subgroups of order 2 should be non-normal.
abstract-algebra group-theory
I am fully aware that this question has already been addressed here and here. The question, however, derives from a Dummit and Foote exercise (section 4.2 exercise 10 page 122) and the answers provided make use of material that appears later in the book, or, at least, I do not clearly understand them in terms of the material that I have studied already.
So, I would like to submit the following tentative proof
'from first principles' (i.e. Dummit and Foote before page 122). As I feel insecure about it, I would be grateful if you could check it.
Consider a nonabelian group G of order 6. By Cauchy's theorem, the group contains at least one element of order 2, and therefore at least one subgroup of order 2. Suppose this/these subgroups are all normal. This would imply that all elements of order 2 commute with all elements of G.
The remaining elements of group G are of order 1 (which trivially is in the center of G), or order 3 (order 6 would imply the group is cyclic and therefore abelian). Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will also be in the center of G.
Therefore, G would be abelian, contrary to the assumption. So, at least one of the subgroups of order 2 should be non-normal.
abstract-algebra group-theory
abstract-algebra group-theory
asked 2 hours ago
Frank De Geeter
604
604
Can you justify this sentence: 'Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will be also in the center.'
– Berci
43 mins ago
add a comment |
Can you justify this sentence: 'Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will be also in the center.'
– Berci
43 mins ago
Can you justify this sentence: 'Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will be also in the center.'
– Berci
43 mins ago
Can you justify this sentence: 'Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will be also in the center.'
– Berci
43 mins ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Basically your reasoning is correct (well done!): to write it with somewhat more "sophistication" - if $N lhd G$, with $|N|=2$, then $N subseteq Z(G)$, that is what you are using. Now if $x in G$ with $ord(x)=3$, then, since $N$ is central, $N subsetneq C_G(x)$, where the inclusion is strict, because of $|N|=2$ not divisible by $3$ ($x in C_G(x)$). But $|G:N|=3$, so $G=C_G(x)$, meaning $x in Z(G)$ and hence $G$ is abelian.
add a comment |
Once you have Cauchy's theorem available it is clear that any non-abelian group $G$ of order $6$ is isomorphic to $S_3$ -- which has a non-normal subgroup of order $2$. Indeed, by Cauchy's theorem there exist elements $r$ and $s$ in $G$ of order $3$ and $2$ respectively. The subgroup $C_3=langle rrangle$ is normal in $G$ because it is of index $2$. So $G=C_3cup C_3cdot s$ and $G={e,r,r^2,s,rs,r^2s}$. Because $C_3$ is normal, $srs^{-1}=r^k$ for some $k=0,1,2$. Since $s^2=e$, we have
$$
r=s^2rs^{-2}=s(srs^{-1})s^{-1}=r^{k^2}
$$
so that $k^2equiv 1 bmod 3$, i.e., $3mid (k-1)(k+1)$. For $3mid (k-1)$ the group is abelian, so that we have $3mid (k+1)$ and $Gcong D_3cong S_3$.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061484%2fevery-nonabelian-group-of-order-6-has-a-non-normal-subgroup-of-order-2-revisite%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Basically your reasoning is correct (well done!): to write it with somewhat more "sophistication" - if $N lhd G$, with $|N|=2$, then $N subseteq Z(G)$, that is what you are using. Now if $x in G$ with $ord(x)=3$, then, since $N$ is central, $N subsetneq C_G(x)$, where the inclusion is strict, because of $|N|=2$ not divisible by $3$ ($x in C_G(x)$). But $|G:N|=3$, so $G=C_G(x)$, meaning $x in Z(G)$ and hence $G$ is abelian.
add a comment |
Basically your reasoning is correct (well done!): to write it with somewhat more "sophistication" - if $N lhd G$, with $|N|=2$, then $N subseteq Z(G)$, that is what you are using. Now if $x in G$ with $ord(x)=3$, then, since $N$ is central, $N subsetneq C_G(x)$, where the inclusion is strict, because of $|N|=2$ not divisible by $3$ ($x in C_G(x)$). But $|G:N|=3$, so $G=C_G(x)$, meaning $x in Z(G)$ and hence $G$ is abelian.
add a comment |
Basically your reasoning is correct (well done!): to write it with somewhat more "sophistication" - if $N lhd G$, with $|N|=2$, then $N subseteq Z(G)$, that is what you are using. Now if $x in G$ with $ord(x)=3$, then, since $N$ is central, $N subsetneq C_G(x)$, where the inclusion is strict, because of $|N|=2$ not divisible by $3$ ($x in C_G(x)$). But $|G:N|=3$, so $G=C_G(x)$, meaning $x in Z(G)$ and hence $G$ is abelian.
Basically your reasoning is correct (well done!): to write it with somewhat more "sophistication" - if $N lhd G$, with $|N|=2$, then $N subseteq Z(G)$, that is what you are using. Now if $x in G$ with $ord(x)=3$, then, since $N$ is central, $N subsetneq C_G(x)$, where the inclusion is strict, because of $|N|=2$ not divisible by $3$ ($x in C_G(x)$). But $|G:N|=3$, so $G=C_G(x)$, meaning $x in Z(G)$ and hence $G$ is abelian.
answered 2 hours ago
Nicky Hekster
28.2k53456
28.2k53456
add a comment |
add a comment |
Once you have Cauchy's theorem available it is clear that any non-abelian group $G$ of order $6$ is isomorphic to $S_3$ -- which has a non-normal subgroup of order $2$. Indeed, by Cauchy's theorem there exist elements $r$ and $s$ in $G$ of order $3$ and $2$ respectively. The subgroup $C_3=langle rrangle$ is normal in $G$ because it is of index $2$. So $G=C_3cup C_3cdot s$ and $G={e,r,r^2,s,rs,r^2s}$. Because $C_3$ is normal, $srs^{-1}=r^k$ for some $k=0,1,2$. Since $s^2=e$, we have
$$
r=s^2rs^{-2}=s(srs^{-1})s^{-1}=r^{k^2}
$$
so that $k^2equiv 1 bmod 3$, i.e., $3mid (k-1)(k+1)$. For $3mid (k-1)$ the group is abelian, so that we have $3mid (k+1)$ and $Gcong D_3cong S_3$.
add a comment |
Once you have Cauchy's theorem available it is clear that any non-abelian group $G$ of order $6$ is isomorphic to $S_3$ -- which has a non-normal subgroup of order $2$. Indeed, by Cauchy's theorem there exist elements $r$ and $s$ in $G$ of order $3$ and $2$ respectively. The subgroup $C_3=langle rrangle$ is normal in $G$ because it is of index $2$. So $G=C_3cup C_3cdot s$ and $G={e,r,r^2,s,rs,r^2s}$. Because $C_3$ is normal, $srs^{-1}=r^k$ for some $k=0,1,2$. Since $s^2=e$, we have
$$
r=s^2rs^{-2}=s(srs^{-1})s^{-1}=r^{k^2}
$$
so that $k^2equiv 1 bmod 3$, i.e., $3mid (k-1)(k+1)$. For $3mid (k-1)$ the group is abelian, so that we have $3mid (k+1)$ and $Gcong D_3cong S_3$.
add a comment |
Once you have Cauchy's theorem available it is clear that any non-abelian group $G$ of order $6$ is isomorphic to $S_3$ -- which has a non-normal subgroup of order $2$. Indeed, by Cauchy's theorem there exist elements $r$ and $s$ in $G$ of order $3$ and $2$ respectively. The subgroup $C_3=langle rrangle$ is normal in $G$ because it is of index $2$. So $G=C_3cup C_3cdot s$ and $G={e,r,r^2,s,rs,r^2s}$. Because $C_3$ is normal, $srs^{-1}=r^k$ for some $k=0,1,2$. Since $s^2=e$, we have
$$
r=s^2rs^{-2}=s(srs^{-1})s^{-1}=r^{k^2}
$$
so that $k^2equiv 1 bmod 3$, i.e., $3mid (k-1)(k+1)$. For $3mid (k-1)$ the group is abelian, so that we have $3mid (k+1)$ and $Gcong D_3cong S_3$.
Once you have Cauchy's theorem available it is clear that any non-abelian group $G$ of order $6$ is isomorphic to $S_3$ -- which has a non-normal subgroup of order $2$. Indeed, by Cauchy's theorem there exist elements $r$ and $s$ in $G$ of order $3$ and $2$ respectively. The subgroup $C_3=langle rrangle$ is normal in $G$ because it is of index $2$. So $G=C_3cup C_3cdot s$ and $G={e,r,r^2,s,rs,r^2s}$. Because $C_3$ is normal, $srs^{-1}=r^k$ for some $k=0,1,2$. Since $s^2=e$, we have
$$
r=s^2rs^{-2}=s(srs^{-1})s^{-1}=r^{k^2}
$$
so that $k^2equiv 1 bmod 3$, i.e., $3mid (k-1)(k+1)$. For $3mid (k-1)$ the group is abelian, so that we have $3mid (k+1)$ and $Gcong D_3cong S_3$.
answered 50 mins ago
Dietrich Burde
77.8k64386
77.8k64386
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061484%2fevery-nonabelian-group-of-order-6-has-a-non-normal-subgroup-of-order-2-revisite%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Can you justify this sentence: 'Since all elements of order 2 are in the center, the order 3 elements will be also in the center.'
– Berci
43 mins ago