Proving G cannot Equal HK When K Contains a Conjugate of H

  • Thread starter SiddharthM
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Conjugate
In summary, the conversation discusses the difficulty of proving a seemingly obvious statement in group theory. Specifically, the statement is that in a finite group G with proper subgroups H and K, if K contains a conjugate of H, then G cannot be equal to the product HK. The conversation includes a request for a proof and a discussion of a special case where Hx^{-1}Hx=G. The final part of the conversation provides some assistance in proving the statement, ultimately leading to the conclusion that if K contains an element c such that cHc^{-1} is a subset of K, then G cannot be equal to the product HK.
  • #1
SiddharthM
176
0
I've been trying to prove something that seems obvious but have had no success thus far:

say G is a finite group and H and K are proper subgroups, if K contains a conjugate of H, then it isn't possible to have G=HK.

Proof anybody? I'm happy if one can prove the special case below:

It's fairly easy to show one can't have the product of a proper subgroup and it's conjugate equal to a group i.e. it isn't possible that Hx^{-1}Hx=G unless H=G. Can you show it for an arbitrary product of conjugates? i.e. if [tex]\Pi_{x \in G} H^x=G[/tex] then H=G. Note that [tex]H^x=x^{-1}Hx[/tex]

thanks for the help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Let c be an element such that [itex]cHc^{-1} \subseteq K[/itex].

Assume G=HK.

Express [itex]c^{-1}[/itex] as a product [itex]c^{-1}=hk[/itex] with h in H and k in K. Then
[tex]1 = chc^{-1}ck[/tex]
[tex](chc^{-1})^{-1}k^{-1} = c[/tex]
both factors on the left hand side are in K so c is in K.

Since c is in K, [itex]H \subseteq c^{-1}Kc = K[/itex]. We then have G=HK=K so K isn't a proper subgroup of G.
 
  • #3
thanks for the prompt reply, i appreciate the help.
 

What does it mean when K contains a conjugate of H?

When K contains a conjugate of H, it means that there is a subgroup of K that is isomorphic to H. In other words, K contains a copy of H within itself.

Why is it important to prove that G cannot equal HK when K contains a conjugate of H?

This type of proof is important because it helps us understand the structure and relationships between subgroups within a larger group. It also allows us to make more accurate and precise conclusions about the properties of the group.

What methods can be used to prove that G cannot equal HK when K contains a conjugate of H?

One method is to use the properties of cosets and Lagrange's theorem to show that the order of G is not equal to the order of HK. Another method is to consider the normality of H and K within G, and use the definition of normal subgroups to show that G cannot equal HK.

Can there be exceptions or special cases where G may equal HK even when K contains a conjugate of H?

Yes, there can be exceptions depending on the specific group and the subgroups involved. For example, if H and K are both normal subgroups of G, then G can equal HK even if K contains a conjugate of H.

How does proving that G cannot equal HK when K contains a conjugate of H impact other areas of mathematics or science?

This type of proof is relevant in many areas of mathematics, including group theory, abstract algebra, and topology. It can also have applications in other fields such as physics and computer science, where group theory is used to study symmetry and other properties of systems.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
774
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top