Prove $|H|$ Divides $|N|$ and $|N|$ Divides $|G|$: Proof Verification

In summary: Your Name]In summary, the conversation is about proving a proposition regarding subgroups and normalizers in a group. The conversation includes a proof for parts (a) and (b), and the expert suggests using cosets and Lagrange's theorem to prove part (c). The expert also offers their assistance for any further questions or clarifications.
  • #1
kalish1
99
0
I would like to check if my proof of this proposition has been correctly done. I would also like help on proving part (c). Thanks in advance.

**Proposition:** Let $H$ be a subgroup of a group $G$, and let $N$ be the normalizer of $H$. Prove that:

(a) $H$ is a normal subgroup of $N$

(b) $H$ is a normal subgroup of $G$ if and only if $N$ = $G$

(c) $|H|$ divides $|N|$ and $|N|$ divides $|G|$.

**Proof:**

Part (a):

Suppose $H$ is a subgroup of $G$. Suppose $N$ is a normalizer of $H$, meaning $N(H)$ $=$ $\{g \in G: gHg^{-1}=H\}$. We want to show that $H$ is a normal subgroup of $N$. Note that by definition: $g$ $\in$ $N$ $\leftrightarrow gHg^{-1}=H$. Thus $gHg^{-1}=H$ for every $g$ $\in$ $N$. Hence, $H$ is normal in $N$.

Part (b): Suppose $H$ is a normal subgroup of $G$. Thus $gHg^{-1}=H$ for every $g$ $\in$ $G$. Thus for every $g$ in $G$, we have $gHg^{-1} = H$ $\in$ $N$. So $G$ is a subset of $N$. Since $N$ is a subset of $G$, we must have $N=G$.

Now other direction: Suppose $N=G$. Then, for every $g \in G$ and $g \in N$, we have: $gHg^{-1} = H$. Thus, by definition of normal, $H$ is normal in $G$.

How do I proceed with part c?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2

Your proof for parts (a) and (b) looks correct. For part (c), here is a possible approach:

To prove that $|H|$ divides $|N|$, we can consider the cosets of $H$ in $N$ and use the fact that $N(H)$ is a subgroup of $N$. Specifically, since $N(H)$ is a subgroup of $N$, we know that $|N(H)|$ divides $|N|$. But $N(H)$ is the set of all elements in $N$ that normalize $H$, so we can write $N(H)$ as a union of cosets of $H$ in $N$ (by definition of cosets). Therefore, $|N(H)|$ is equal to the number of cosets of $H$ in $N$, which is denoted by $[N:H]$. So we have $|N(H)| = [N:H] \cdot |H|$. Since $|N(H)|$ divides $|N|$, we have $[N:H] \cdot |H|$ divides $|N|$, which means $|H|$ divides $|N|$.

To prove that $|N|$ divides $|G|$, we can use a similar approach. We know that $N$ is a subgroup of $G$, so $|N|$ divides $|G|$ by Lagrange's theorem. But we also know that $N$ is the set of all elements in $G$ that normalize $H$, so we can write $N$ as a union of cosets of $H$ in $G$. Therefore, $|N|$ is equal to the number of cosets of $H$ in $G$, which is denoted by $[G:H]$. So we have $|N| = [G:H] \cdot |H|$. Since $|N|$ divides $|G|$ and $|H|$ divides $|N|$, we can conclude that $|N|$ divides $|G|$.

I hope this helps. Let me know if you have any further questions or if you would like me to clarify any part of the proof.
 

FAQ: Prove $|H|$ Divides $|N|$ and $|N|$ Divides $|G|$: Proof Verification

How do you prove that the order of a subgroup divides the order of the parent group?

To prove that the order of a subgroup divides the order of the parent group, we use the Lagrange's Theorem. This theorem states that for any subgroup H of a finite group G, the order of H divides the order of G. This can be proven by showing that the elements of H form a partition of the elements of G.

What is the significance of proving that the order of a subgroup divides the order of the parent group?

Proving that the order of a subgroup divides the order of the parent group is significant because it helps us understand the structure of a group. It also allows us to determine the possible orders of subgroups, which can help in solving various problems in group theory and other areas of mathematics.

How do you verify a proof that the order of a subgroup divides the order of the parent group?

To verify a proof that the order of a subgroup divides the order of the parent group, we need to carefully examine the proof and make sure that all the steps are logically sound. We also need to check if the proof uses any theorems or properties that have been proven previously. If the proof is correct, we should be able to follow each step and arrive at the conclusion that the order of the subgroup divides the order of the parent group.

Can a subgroup have an order that does not divide the order of the parent group?

No, a subgroup cannot have an order that does not divide the order of the parent group. This is because of the Lagrange's Theorem which states that the order of any subgroup must divide the order of the parent group. If a subgroup has an order that does not divide the order of the parent group, then it would contradict the theorem and therefore, cannot exist.

Can the order of a subgroup and the order of the parent group be equal?

Yes, the order of a subgroup and the order of the parent group can be equal. In fact, this is often the case for cyclic groups, where the parent group and its subgroups have the same order. However, it is not always the case and there can be subgroups with orders that are proper divisors of the order of the parent group.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top