Fraction of Elements in a group mapped to own inverse by automorphism

deluks917
Messages
379
Reaction score
4
Q: Given a fraction A/B when does there exist a finite group G and an automorphism f s.t. exactly A/B elements of G are mapped to their own inverses (f(a) = a-1? If so how can we find the group? Does anything change if we allow infinite groups?

I have a friend who was preparing for an intro to abstract algebra class. So we were going over questions that the professor had asked him. On one exam he had been asked if there was a group with automorphism that sent 3/4 of the group to their own inverses. He found by considering small groups that D4 the symmetries of the circles worked with the identity automorphism. We could not think of a way to solve this question in general.

if 1 > A/B > 1/2 then G can't be abelian because in abelian group the elemnts mapped homomorphically to their own inverses is a subgroup.

If A/B = C/D * E/F then we can find the solution for the RHS groups we can take a direct product and get A/B.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would consider Galois groups of field extensions. It should be possible to find extension towers with the required properties, depending a bit on ##A## and ##B##.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
568
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
433
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top