Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups .... Aluffi, Theorem 3.2

In summary, Peter is trying to understand why it follows from a particular condition that a group is not normal. He also explains how it follows that the group is not normal and why this is the only possible conclusion.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,990
48
I am reading Paolo Aluffi's book, Algebra: Chapter 0 ... I am currently focused on Chapter 4, Section 3: Composition Series and Solvability ...

I need help with an aspect of Aluffi's proof of the Jordan-Holder Theorem (Theorem 3.2, page 206) which reads as follows:

Theorem 3.2 and the early part of the proof read as follows:View attachment 4912
etc ... etc
In the above proof we read:

" ... ... We may assume \(\displaystyle G_1 \neq {G'}_1\). Note that \(\displaystyle G_1 {G'}_1 = G\): indeed, \(\displaystyle G_1 {G'}_1\) is normal in \(\displaystyle G\) and \(\displaystyle G_1 \subset G_1 {G'}_1\) ... ... "
Question 1

Why does it follow from \(\displaystyle G_1 \neq {G'}_1\) that \(\displaystyle G_1 {G'}_1 = G\) ... ... ?Question 2

Further, how does it follow that \(\displaystyle G_1 {G'}_1\) is normal in \(\displaystyle G\) ... ?Question 3

Further yet, how does it follow that \(\displaystyle G_1 \subset G_1 {G'}_1\) ... ... ?
I hope that someone can help ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi Peter,
Peter said:
Question 1

Why does it follow from \(\displaystyle G_1 \neq {G'}_1\) that \(\displaystyle G_1 {G'}_1 = G\) ... ... ?

This question will be answered after I answer Questions 2 and 3. ;)
Question 2

Further, how does it follow that \(\displaystyle G_1 {G'}_1\) is normal in \(\displaystyle G\) ... ?

Recall that if $A$ and $B$ are normal subgroups of a group $G$, then $AB$ is normal in $G$. Apply this result with $A = G_1$ and $B = G_1^{'}$.
Question 3

Further yet, how does it follow that \(\displaystyle G_1 \subset G_1 {G'}_1\) ... ... ?

Since $e\in G_1^{'}$, for all $g \in G_1$, $g = g\cdot e \in G_1 G_1^{'}$. Therefore, $G_1\subset G_1 G_1^{'}$.

Now, having answered the last two questions, I can answer Question 1. If $G_1 \neq G_1^{'}$, then there is some $g\in G_1^{'}$ such that $g\notin G_1$. So then $g = e\cdot g \in G_1G_1^{'}$, even though $g\notin G_1$. This means $G_1 \neq G_1G_1^{'}$. But since $G_1\subseteq G_1G_1^{'}$, we have $G_1 \subsetneq G_1 G_1^{'}$.

Consider the factor group $G/G_1$. It is a simple group by construction of the composition series, so it has no nontrivial normal subgroups. Using the lattice isomorphism theorem, we deduce that this is equivalent to there being no normal subgroups $N$ of $G$ such that $G_1 \subsetneq N \subsetneq G$. Since $N = G_1G_1^{'}$ is normal in $G$ and satisfies $G_1 \subsetneq N \subset G$, then by the previous statement, the only possibility is that $N = G$.
 
  • #3
Euge said:
Hi Peter,

This question will be answered after I answer Questions 2 and 3. ;)Recall that if $A$ and $B$ are normal subgroups of a group $G$, then $AB$ is normal in $G$. Apply this result with $A = G_1$ and $B = G_1^{'}$.

Since $e\in G_1^{'}$, for all $g \in G_1$, $g = g\cdot e \in G_1 G_1^{'}$. Therefore, $G_1\subset G_1 G_1^{'}$.

Now, having answered the last two questions, I can answer Question 1. If $G_1 \neq G_1^{'}$, then there is some $g\in G_1^{'}$ such that $g\notin G_1$. So then $g = e\cdot g \in G_1G_1^{'}$, even though $g\notin G_1$. This means $G_1 \neq G_1G_1^{'}$. But since $G_1\subseteq G_1G_1^{'}$, we have $G_1 \subsetneq G_1 G_1^{'}$.

Consider the factor group $G/G_1$. It is a simple group by construction of the composition series, so it has no nontrivial normal subgroups. Using the lattice isomorphism theorem, we deduce that this is equivalent to there being no normal subgroups $N$ of $G$ such that $G_1 \subsetneq N \subsetneq G$. Since $N = G_1G_1^{'}$ is normal in $G$ and satisfies $G_1 \subsetneq N \subset G$, then by the previous statement, the only possibility is that $N = G$.
Thanks so much for the help, Euge ... it is much appreciated ...

Just working through your post now ...

Thanks again,

Peter
 

1. What is the Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups?

The Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups is a fundamental result in group theory that states that any two composition series of a group have the same length and the same composition factors (up to permutation and isomorphism). It also states that the composition factors are unique, meaning that any two composition series of a group will have the same set of composition factors (up to permutation and isomorphism).

2. Who discovered the Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups?

The Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups was first proved by Camille Jordan in 1870 and later rediscovered by Otto Hölder in 1889. It was then further generalized by Feit and Schur in 1954.

3. What is the significance of the Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups?

The Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups is significant because it provides a way to study the structure of groups by breaking them down into simpler, more easily understood pieces. It also allows for the classification of groups into different types based on their composition factors.

4. How is the Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups used in mathematics?

The Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups is used extensively in group theory, which is a branch of mathematics that studies the properties of groups. It is also used in other areas of mathematics, such as algebraic geometry and number theory.

5. Can the Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups be applied to non-abelian groups?

Yes, the Jordan-Holder Theorem for Groups can be applied to both abelian and non-abelian groups. However, it is often more useful for non-abelian groups as it allows for a more detailed analysis of their structure.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
956
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top