Results 1 to 4 of 4

Math Help - Sylow's theorem proof

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    28

    Cool Sylow's theorem proof

    Let G be a finite group and H be a subgroup of G.
    (a) Show that for any x ∈ G, the subset x^-1 Hx is a subgroup of G
    (b) Show that the number of distinct subgroups of the form x^-1 Hx equals iG(N(H))
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Mar 2011
    From
    Tejas
    Posts
    3,383
    Thanks
    750

    Re: Sylow's theorem proof

    (a) use the one-step subgroup test.
    (b) suppose xHx^-1 = yHy^-1. prove that x and y lie in the same coset of N(H).
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    28

    Re: Sylow's theorem proof

    This is what I have so far. Look okay?

    (a): For any h, h' ∈ H, (x^(-1)hx) (x^(-1)h'x) = x^(-1) (h h') x and (x^(-1)hx)^(-1) = x^(-1) h^(-1) x, so x^(-1) H x is closed under multiplication and taking inverses. Also, if e is the identity of G, x^(-1) e x = e, so e ∈ x^(-1) H x. Therefore, x^(-1) H x is a subgroup of G.

    (b): I think the statement that we're being asked to prove is that the number of distinct subgroups of the form x^(-1) H x equals [G:N(H)], where N(H) is the normalizer of H in G. If S is the set of subgroups { x^(-1) H x | x ∈ G}, observe that G acts on S by conjugation:

    (g, x^(-1) H x) -> g^(-1) x^(-1) H x g = (xg)^(-1) H xg.

    This action is clearly transitive on S, so by the orbit-stabilizer theorem, the size of S will equal the index in G of the stabilizer of H for this action. But this stabilizer is just { x ∈ G | x^(-1) H x = H }, which is N(H), so we have the desired result.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Mar 2011
    From
    Tejas
    Posts
    3,383
    Thanks
    750

    Re: Sylow's theorem proof

    looks good. the orbit-stabilizer appeal is a nice touch.

    for (a) you don't need to show that e is in x^-1Hx. x^-1Hx is clearly non-empty since any x^-1hx is "some" element of G, for any h in H, and closure and inverses together imply that:

    (x^-1hx)(x^-1hx)^-1 = e is in xHx^-1.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Sylow's Theorem
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 12th 2011, 09:54 PM
  2. Sylow's theorem
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 14th 2010, 04:03 PM
  3. Abstract-Sylow THEOREM
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 11th 2009, 11:41 PM
  4. Sylow's Theorem
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 12th 2008, 09:01 AM
  5. Sylow's theorem
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: February 18th 2007, 06:31 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum