Solving: How H Normalises [H,K]?

  • Thread starter Silversonic
  • Start date
In summary: This is true since ##aBa^{-1} \subseteq B## for all ##a\in A## and thus ##a^{-1}Ba \subseteq B## for all ##a^{-1}\in A##.
  • #1
Silversonic
130
1
I'm slightly confused by definition of normalises.

It's shown in my notes that for two subgroups H, K of G we have

[itex] [H,K]^{h_1} ≤ [H,K] [/itex] for all [itex] h_1 [/itex] in [itex] H [/itex]

and then it says

"and so [itex] H [/itex] normalises [itex] [H,K] [/itex]."

It hasn't been fully introduced to me what a subgroup normalising another subgroup means. But a bit of searching around shows H normalises [H,K] means that [itex] [H,K]^{h} = [H,K] [/itex] for all h in H.

Clearly [itex] [H,K]^{h} \subseteq [H,K] [/itex] from above. But showing [itex] [H,K]^{h} \supseteq [H,K] [/itex] I can't seem to work out.

I've tried myself, I've looked around. Even wikipedia explains it;

http://groupprops.subwiki.org/wiki/Subgroup_normalizes_its_commutator_with_any_subset

But I can't understand how [a,h] is a generating set for H, and even if it was how that goes on to help the proof anyway.

Can anyone shed some light my way?

Edit: I apologise for not realising this should be posted in the HW section.
I may have found my own proof if anyone doesn't mind reading it.

To show [itex] [H,K] \subseteq [H,K]^{h} [/itex] amounts to showing that for any [itex] a \in [H,K] [/itex] we have [itex] a \in [H,K]^h [/itex]

This amounts to showing there exists [itex] b \in [H,K] [/itex] such that

[itex] a = h^{-1} b h [/itex]

Equivalent to showing that

[itex] b = hah^{-1} = a^{h^{-1}}[/itex] is an element of [itex] [H,K] [/itex]

By definition

[itex] [H,K] = <[h,k] | h \in H, k \in K> [/itex]

By noting that [itex] [h_m,k_m]^{-1} [/itex] can be written in the form of [itex][h_j,k_j][/itex], [itex] a [/itex] can written in the form

[itex] a = [h_1 , k_1][h_2,k_2]...[h_n,k_n] [/itex]

[itex] a^{h^{-1}} = [h_1 , k_1]^{h^{-1}}[h_2,k_2]^{h^{-1}}...[h_n,k_n]^{h^{-1}}[/itex]

It is easily shown that any [itex][h_j, k_j]^{h}[/itex] for [itex] h \in H [/itex] is an element of [itex] [H,K] [/itex] and hence as [itex][H,K][/itex] is a group, [itex] a^{h^{-1}} \in [H,K] [/itex]

There's probably a shorter proof, because the wikipedia page makes it seem like it's about 1 lines worth.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
##A## normalises ##B## means ##aBa^{-1} \subseteq B## for all ##a\in A##. The equality holds, because you can simple rewrite it as ##B \subseteq a^{-1}Ba##.
 

1. What is "Solving: How H Normalises [H,K]"?

"Solving: How H Normalises [H,K]" is a scientific problem that involves finding the solutions for how an element or group H normalizes the commutator [H,K] with another element or group K. This problem is commonly encountered in group theory and algebraic structures.

2. Why is solving this problem important?

Solving this problem is important because it helps in understanding the structure and behavior of groups and other mathematical objects. It also has applications in various fields such as physics, chemistry, and computer science.

3. What are some common techniques for solving this problem?

Some common techniques for solving this problem include using the definition of normalizers, using group actions, and using group presentations and generators. Other techniques may also involve applying specific properties of the elements or groups involved.

4. Can this problem be solved for all groups and elements?

No, this problem cannot be solved for all groups and elements. In some cases, the solution may not exist or may be too complex to determine. However, it can be solved for a wide range of groups and elements, including finite and infinite groups.

5. What are some real-world applications of solving this problem?

This problem has various real-world applications, such as in cryptography for creating secure codes, in chemistry for predicting molecular structures, and in physics for understanding symmetries and conservation laws. It also has applications in computer science for optimizing algorithms and data structures.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Constructive Proofs Proof of Correspondence theorem
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
Replies
1
Views
991
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
952
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
Replies
16
Views
5K
Back
Top