A problem from Artin's algebra textbook

  • Thread starter Thread starter AbelAkil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra Textbook
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem from algebra concerning the intersection of cosets of subgroups H and K within a group G. The participants are tasked with proving properties related to these intersections and their implications on subgroup indices.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the nature of the intersection of cosets xH and yK, questioning whether it can be a subgroup and discussing the conditions under which this holds. There are attempts to clarify the definitions and properties of cosets and subgroups.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided hints and guidance on how to approach the proofs, particularly regarding the intersection of cosets and the implications for subgroup indices. There is ongoing exploration of the relationships between the indices of the subgroups involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of subgroup properties and the definitions of cosets, with some expressing uncertainty about the generality of certain statements. There is a focus on ensuring the correctness of assumptions made in the proofs.

AbelAkil
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


(a)Let H and K be subgroups of a group G. Prove that the intersection of xH and yK which are cosets of H and K is either empty or else is a coset of the subgroup H intersect K

(b) Prove that if H and K have finite index in G then the intersection of H and K also has finite index.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


The intersection of xH and yK is a subgroup of both H and K, then how to continue?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
AbelAkil said:

The Attempt at a Solution


The intersection of xH and yK is a subgroup of both H and K, then how to continue?
This is not true in general. If xH and yK are not subgroups, then neither contains the identity, so their intersection also doesn't contain the identiy. So it can't be a subgroup.

Moreover, in general [itex]xH \cap yK[/itex] isn't even a subSET of H or K. xH and H are disjoint unless [itex]x \in H[/itex]. Similarly for yK and K.
 
jbunniii said:
This is not true in general. If xH and yK are not subgroups, then neither contains the identity, so their intersection also doesn't contain the identiy. So it can't be a subgroup.

Moreover, in general [itex]xH \cap yK[/itex] isn't even a subSET of H or K. xH and H are disjoint unless [itex]x \in H[/itex]. Similarly for yK and K.
Sorry, I made some mistakes when I wrote the post. In fact, I mean the intersection of H and K is a subgroup of both H and K...Could U give me some tips to prove it?
 
If xH and yK have nonempty intersection, then there is an element g contained in both: [itex]g \in xH[/itex] and [itex]g \in yK[/itex].

The cosets of [itex]H \cap K[/itex] form a partition of G, so g is contained in exactly one such coset, call it [itex]a(H \cap K)[/itex].

If you can show that [itex]a(H \cap K)[/itex] is contained in both [itex]xH[/itex] and [itex]yK[/itex] then you're done.

Hint: both [itex]xH[/itex] and [itex]yK[/itex] are partitioned by cosets of [itex]H \cap K[/itex].
 
jbunniii said:
If xH and yK have nonempty intersection, then there is an element g contained in both: [itex]g \in xH[/itex] and [itex]g \in yK[/itex].

The cosets of [itex]H \cap K[/itex] form a partition of G, so g is contained in exactly one such coset, call it [itex]a(H \cap K)[/itex].

If you can show that [itex]a(H \cap K)[/itex] is contained in both [itex]xH[/itex] and [itex]yK[/itex] then you're done.

Hint: both [itex]xH[/itex] and [itex]yK[/itex] are partitioned by cosets of [itex]H \cap K[/itex].
Yeah...I get it. Thanks very much. In addition, how to prove part (b), that is how can I show that both [itex]H[/itex] and [itex]K[/itex] are partitioned by finite cosets of [itex]H \cap K[/itex]... I appreciate your insightful answer!
 
the index of H in G is the number of cosets of H.

if this number is finite, then if it just so happened that H∩K was of finite index in H, we get:

[G:H][H:H∩K] cosets of H∩K in G in all, which would be finite.

can you think of a way to show that [H:H∩K] ≤ [G:K]? perhaps you can think of an injection from left cosets of H∩K in H to left cosets of K in G?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K