MHB Can You Prove These Properties of Normal Subgroups in Group Theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cbarker1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Normal
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving properties of normal subgroups in group theory, specifically regarding two normal subgroups, H and K, of a group G. It is established that if H is contained in K, then H is also a normal subgroup of K, as it satisfies the condition kHk^{-1} = H for all k in K. Additionally, it is shown that K/H is a normal subgroup of G/H, requiring the demonstration that the cosets of K/H remain invariant under conjugation by elements of G/H. The conversation emphasizes the importance of definitions and properties of normal subgroups to complete these proofs. Understanding these relationships is crucial for deeper insights into group theory.
cbarker1
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
345
Reaction score
23
Dear Everyone,

I am struck on a problem dealing with normal subgroups.

The problem is the following:

Let $G$ be a group, $H$ and $K$ be normal subgroups of $G$ with $H\ge K$.
  1. Prove that $H$ is a normal subgroup of $K$
  2. Prove that $K/H$ is a normal subgroup of $G/H$.
My attempted work:

Proof: We know that $H,K\ge G$.

Thanks
Carter B
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cbarker1 said:
The problem is the following:

Let $G$ be a group, $H$ and $K$ be normal subgroups of $G$ with $H\ge K$.
  1. Prove that $H$ is a normal subgroup of $K$
  2. Prove that $K/H$ is a normal subgroup of $G/H$.
It looks as though $H\ge K$ should be $H\le K$. The rest of the question certainly implies that $H$ is contained in $K$.

Start by writing down the definition of a normal subgroup. Use that definition to say what it means for $H$ to be a normal subgroup of $G$. You should be able to deduce the result 1. from that.

For 2., again start by writing down some definitions. How is a quotient group defined? Then what conditions does $K/H$ have to satisfy in order to be a normal subgroup of $G/H$?
 
Cbarker1 said:
Dear Everyone,

I am struck on a problem dealing with normal subgroups.

The problem is the following:

Let $G$ be a group, $H$ and $K$ be normal subgroups of $G$ with $H{\color{red}\le} K$.
  1. Prove that $H$ is a normal subgroup of $K$
  2. Prove that $K/H$ is a normal subgroup of $G/H$.
My attempted work:

Proof: We know that $H,K{\color{red}\le} G$.

Thanks
Carter B

Hi Carter.

Note the corrections in red.

1. To show that $H$ is a normal subgroup of $K$, you need to snow that $kHk^{-1}=H$ for all $k\in K$. But $H$ is a normal subgroup of $G$, i.e. $gHg^{-1}=H$ for all $g\in G$. Can you complete the proof?2. $K/H$ is the set of all cosets of $H$ in $K$, i.e. cosets of the form $kH$ for $k\in K$. An element of $G/H$ is a coset of the form $gH$ where $g\in G$. To show that $K/H$ is a normal subgroup of $G/H$, you need to show that
$$\left(gH\right)\left(kH\right)\left(gH\right)^{-1}$$
is in $K/H$. The above is equal to
$$\left(gkg^{-1}\right)H.$$
As $K$ is normal in $G$, what can you say about $gkg^{-1}$?
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
491
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
840
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K