Question of lagrange theorem converse.

In summary, the theorem being discussed is Cauchy's theorem, which states that any abelian group G with a prime number p dividing its order ord(G) must have a subgroup of order p. This theorem is also true for non-abelian groups, and can be proven using various methods, such as induction on the order of the group.
  • #1
betty2301
21
0

Homework Statement


Let G be an abelian group. Suppose p divides ord(G) where p is prime no. Prove G has a subgroup of order p.


Homework Equations



lagrange theorem converse

The Attempt at a Solution


i know the converse is lagrange theorem and easy and this is not the case.
I know abelian has something to do with this and prime no is also something special. I also believe the subgroup of order p is cyclic?
thx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes, any group of prime order is cyclic.

The theorem you are being asked to prove is called Cauchy's theorem, and it is true even if G is not abelian. There are numerous ways to prove it, depending on what results you already know. Maybe the most straightforward way is induction on [itex]|G|[/itex].
 

1. What is the converse of Lagrange's theorem?

The converse of Lagrange's theorem states that if a group has a subgroup, then the order of the subgroup must divide the order of the group.

2. How is the converse of Lagrange's theorem used in mathematics?

The converse of Lagrange's theorem is used to prove the existence of subgroups within a group. It helps to understand the structure of groups and their subgroups.

3. What is the significance of the converse of Lagrange's theorem?

The converse of Lagrange's theorem is significant because it helps to establish the fundamental relationship between a group and its subgroups. It also aids in the classification of finite groups.

4. Is the converse of Lagrange's theorem always true?

Yes, the converse of Lagrange's theorem is always true. It is a fundamental theorem in group theory and is widely used in various branches of mathematics.

5. Can you provide an example of the converse of Lagrange's theorem in action?

For example, if a group has an order of 12 and we find a subgroup with an order of 4, then according to the converse of Lagrange's theorem, 4 must divide 12. This shows that the subgroup is a valid subgroup of the given group.

Similar threads

Lagrange multipliers understanding
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
467
Cyclic group has 3 subgroups, what is the order of G
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
Corollaries of Lagrange's Theorm
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
Show that ##G\simeq \mathbb{Z}/2p\mathbb{Z}##
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
962
MHB Show that the groups are abelian
    • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
783
Normal group of order 60 isomorphic to A_5
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
808
Characterizing subgroups of a cyclic group
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
Solving Geodesic Equations with Euler-Lagrange and Noether's Theorem
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
Group Theory: Finite Abelian Groups - An element of order
    • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
MHB Statements about group-order-centralizer
    • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
649

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top