Conjugates in the normalizer of a p-Sylow subgroup

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mathdope
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Subgroup
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a p-Sylow subgroup P of a group G, focusing on elements a and b that are in the center Z(P) of P and are conjugate in G. The task is to prove that these elements are also conjugate in the normalizer N(P) of P.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of elements being in the center of P and their conjugacy in G. There is an exploration of whether demonstrating that a conjugating element x must lie in N(P) is sufficient. Questions arise regarding the relationships between the centers and normalizers of the subgroups involved.

Discussion Status

Some participants have shared their findings and reasoning but have not reached a consensus or solution. There is an indication that further exploration is needed, and one participant has offered to share their solution if others are interested.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the use of standard results from Sylow theory and the uniqueness of Sylow p-subgroups in the context of normalizers and centers. There is uncertainty about the uniqueness of the centers of a and b in relation to their Sylow subgroups.

Mathdope
Messages
138
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Conjugates in the normalizer of a p-Sylow subgroup

Homework Statement


Let P be a p-Sylow subgroup of G and suppose that a,b lie in Z(P), the center of P, and that a, b are conjugate in G. Prove that they are conjugate in N(P), the normalizer of P (also called stablilizer in other texts I believe).

This is problem 29 from section 2.11 of Herstein's Abstract Algebra, the last problem in Chapter 2.


Homework Equations


Any of the standard results in Sylow theory are usable.



The Attempt at a Solution


I believe that it would be sufficient to demonstrate that if b = x^(-1)ax then x must lie in the normalizer of P, N(P).

We know that if x is in N(P) then x^(-1)Px = P. We also know that both a and b commute with every element of P. In fact, we also know that x can't be in P, unless a = b. This doesn't seem like it should be too difficult, but I would love a small hint of what direction to take.

Thanks all.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
*bump*
 
Well, let me put up some more of what I have found - still no solution.

Since a,b [itex]\in Z(P)[/itex] we know that [itex]P \subseteq C(a)[/itex] and [itex]P \subseteq C(b)[/itex]. Since P [itex]\subseteq[/itex] N(P) we also know that [itex]P \subseteq N(P) \cap C(a)[/itex] and [itex]P \subseteq N(P) \cap C(b)[/itex].

Further, [itex]x^{-1} C(a) x[/itex] = [itex]C(b)[/itex] so that the conjugate Sylow subgroup [itex]Q = x^{-1}Px \subseteq C(b)[/itex].

We know that N(P) and N(Q) each have unique Sylow p-subgroups P and Q respectively. If we know in addition that C(a) and C(b) also have unique p-Sylow subgroups then this would solve the problem. However I know of no reason why this must be the case. Anybody see anything obvious that I'm missing (or not obvious :confused:)?

Thanks again all.
 
OK solved, if anyone wants to see solution let me know.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K