How can the normality of a subgroup be proven when the group has a finite index?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the normality of subgroups within the context of group theory, specifically focusing on a subgroup of finite index and the n-th congruence subgroup of GL(n, ℤ). The scope includes theoretical aspects of group properties and subgroup characteristics.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to prove that the intersection of conjugates of a subgroup A, denoted N, is a normal subgroup of finite index in G, suggesting that the finite index of A may be relevant.
  • Another participant questions the normality of N by asking if y is in N, is x-1yx also in N, indicating a need for clarification on the properties of conjugation.
  • For the second problem, a participant asserts that the normality of G(m) can be shown using properties of modular arithmetic, suggesting that the multiplication of matrices mod m retains the subgroup structure.
  • A participant expresses difficulty in proving that the inverse of an element in G(m) is also in G(m), indicating a need for further exploration of subgroup criteria.
  • Another participant points out that the normality proof should involve reducing matrices mod m, implying that the approach taken may have overlooked this critical step.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and approaches to proving normality, with some suggesting methods while others highlight potential errors or oversights. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific proofs and methods for establishing normality in both cases.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the proofs involve complex manipulations of matrix entries and modular arithmetic, which may introduce additional challenges. There is also an acknowledgment of the need to clarify definitions and properties related to subgroup inverses and normality.

VoleMeister
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Having trouble with a couple of algebra questions and would really appreciate any hints or pointers.

1. A is a subgroup of group G with a finite index. Show that
N = \bigcap_{x \in G}x^{-1}Ax
is a normal subgroup of finite index in G.

I'm able to show that N is a subgroup of G by applying the subgroup test. Thing is, I'm not sure how to prove that it's a normal subgroup. It seems that the fact that A is of finite index should play into it somehow.

2. Let G = GL(n,\mathbb{Z}) for n \ge 2. Define the n-th converge subgroup, G(m), as G(m) = \left\{A \in G : A\equiv I_n\mod m\right\}.
Show that G(m) is a normal subgroup.

Tried thinking of this as x^-1yx where x is just a GL matrix and y is one of G(m) and trying to show that this product is one of G(m). Wrote some formulas for individual entries of the product matrix, but doesn't seem to work in terms of guaranteeing that each non-diagonal entry is a multiple of m, and every digonal entry is a multiple of m and with an extra 1. Although perhaps it's just that this gets somewhat messy and I made some silly mistake somewhere.

Thanks in advance. Any help is really appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
1. if y is in N, is x^-1yx?

2. It seems clear to me that (AB) mod m (I presume m is an integer, and mod m means take the entries mod m) is equal to (A mod m)(B mod m) mod m, since multiplication is just addition and multiplication of the entires of A and B. So normality is straightforward in 2. I think your method does work, though it is messy. If you want another way to think about it, A=I mod m means that A=I+A', and A' is a matrix where every entry is divisible by m. That should be easier to visualize, and for you to prove it directly. You should at least show that the set of matrices {B:B=0 mod m} is an ideal.
 
Thanks for your help. The hint for the first one was a good step in the right direction.

One the second one, I've made progress, but I could use a bit of clarification on two points.
-First, to show that G(m) is a subgroup of G one of the things I need to do is show that if A is in G(m) then its inverse is also in G(m). I'm having trouble proving that point.
-Secondly, I tried going about proving normality in the most conventional manner showing that gG(m)=G(m)g (for all g belonging to G). In other terms, for all g belonging to G and for all a belonging to G(m), ga=ag. Thus, g(a'+I)=(a'+I)g. This simplifies to ga'=a'g, but this isn't true in general for matrices. Where am I going wrong?
 
You're going wrong because you're not reducing mod m. You're not supposed to show what you're trying to show - remember the group G(m) is, or ought to be, with multiplication mod m too.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K