Comparing $gH$ and $Hg$ for Infinite & Finite Groups

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the left and right cosets of a subgroup \( H \) in a group \( G \), specifically examining the conditions under which \( gH = Hg \) holds true. Participants explore this question for both infinite and finite groups, considering various properties and implications of the subgroup and the element \( g \).

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if \( G \) is an infinite group and \( H \) is an infinite subgroup, the condition \( \forall h \in H\ \exists h' \in H \) such that \( gh = h'g \) may not necessarily imply \( gH = Hg \).
  • One participant suggests that the mapping \( h \mapsto h' \) might not be a bijection, which could lead to \( gH \subseteq Hg \) in general.
  • Another participant argues that the condition holds for finite groups, stating that it implies \( gH \subset Hg \) and that both cosets must have the same number of elements, leading to \( gH = Hg \).
  • There is a claim that the statement also holds for commutative groups, regardless of whether they are finite or infinite, without needing the given condition.
  • A participant rephrases the problem in terms of conjugation, questioning whether \( gHg^{-1} = H \) under certain conditions, and provides an example illustrating that this is not always true.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the conditions provided, with no consensus reached on whether \( gH = Hg \) can be concluded in the general case. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the applicability of the conditions to both infinite and finite groups.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the mappings and relationships discussed depend on the structure of the groups involved, and there are unresolved assumptions regarding the nature of the subgroup \( H \) and the element \( g \). Specific examples and counterexamples are provided to illustrate the complexity of the relationships.

alexmahone
Messages
303
Reaction score
0
Suppose $G$ is an infinite group and $H$ is an infinite subgroup of $G$.

Let $g\in G$.

Suppose $\forall h\in H\ \exists h'\in H$ such that $gh=h'g$.

Can we conclude that $gH=Hg$?

What if $G$ and $H$ are of finite orders?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Alexmahone said:
Suppose $G$ is an infinite group and $H$ is an infinite subgroup of $G$.

Let $g\in G$.

Suppose $\forall h\in H\ \exists h'\in H$ such that $gh=h'g$.

Can we conclude that $gH=Hg$?

What if $G$ and $H$ are of finite orders?
I don't have an answer, just an observation. It is possible that given g and h that the h' might generate a subset of H, not all of H. (ie. [math]\exists f: H \to H'[/math] is not an bijection.) In which case [math]gH = H'g \subseteq Hg[/math] in general. I don't know if that helps or not.

-Dan
 
Alexmahone said:
Suppose $G$ is an infinite group and $H$ is an infinite subgroup of $G$.

Let $g\in G$.

Suppose $\forall h\in H\ \exists h'\in H$ such that $gh=h'g$.

Can we conclude that $gH=Hg$?

What if $G$ and $H$ are of finite orders?

Hi Alexmahone,

I believe your statement is correct, but only for finite groups. Suppose $G$ is finite. The given condition implies $gH \subset Hg$. Since there is a bijection $gH \leftrightarrow Hg$, then $gH$ and $Hg$ have the same number of elements. Hence, $gH = Hg$.
 
Actually, the statement also holds when $G$ is commutative, infinite or not. The condition would not be needed in such a case.
 
Your problem rephrased slightly:
If $G$ is a group, $H$ a subgroup of $G$ and $g\in G$ with $gHg^{-1}\subseteq H$, does $gHg^{-1}=H$?

Euge has answered in the affirmative for some cases; also this follows if $g$ has finite order, easy proof.

I think an example is needed that shows this is not always true. To follow the example, you need to know a little about group presentations.

Let $G=<a\,,b\,:\, b^{-1}ab=a^2>,\,H=<a>\text{ and } g=b^{-1}$
Since conjugation is a homomorphism, $gHg^{-1}\subseteq H$. If this conjugation were an onto map, there would exist an integer $k$ with $ga^kg^{-1}=a$. But $ga^kg^{-1}=a^{2k}$ . Since $a$ has infinite order (loosely speaking there is no relation that allows $a$ to have finite order), we would get that $2k=1$, impossible. So $gHg^{-1}\neq H$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
767
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K