1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Normal subgroups

  1. Dec 28, 2008 #1
    What is an example of a finite group G that has a subgroup H which is not normal but for which the index [G:H] is prime?

    I was thinking about the alternating group A4 which has order 12, I know that the subgroups of A4 must have order 12, 6, 4, 3 , 2 or 1. But we need a prime index so I can eliminate subgroups of order 1,2 and 3 and 12. Also A4 does not have a subgroup of index 2, so I can also eliminate subgroups of order 6. So here I am looking for a subgroup of A4 of order 4.
    What would that be? Or any other example that satisfies the requirements.
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 28, 2008 #2
    Well, there is one subgroup of A_4 which has order 4, but unfortunately for your problem, it's also a normal subgroup of A_4. (Specifically, this subgroup is {(1), (12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)}). And this is the only subgroup of A_4 having order 4, so I'm afraid that using A_4 as the overgroup is a doomed approach.

    Try letting G=S_5 and H be the obvious embedding of S_4 into S_5. I'm sure you can prove that the resulting subgroup isn't normal.
  4. Dec 28, 2008 #3
    Thanks, by embedding, do you mean that we just consider the permutations of the numbers {1,2,3,4} and assume that 5 is fixed? Also I was thinking maybe for proving that S_4 is not normal in S_5 to show that there exists an element g in S_5 such that gS_4g^-1 is not contained in S_4.
    So I choose g=(12345), x=(1234) in S_4
    hence gxg^-1=(1235) which is not in S_4. Is this valid?
  5. Dec 28, 2008 #4
    Yes, that's the embedding I was thinking of.

    Your approach is right on, but your arithmetic is wrong. [itex]gxg^{-1}(1) = gx(5) = g(5) = 1[/itex], so [itex]gxg^{-1}[/itex] cannot possibly be (1235). (In fact, for your given choice, [itex]gxg^{-1} = \text{(2345)}[/itex]).
  6. Dec 28, 2008 #5
    Oh yes, you're right, I guess I was doing g^-1xg instead of gxg^-1.

Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Normal subgroups
  1. Normal Subgroups (Replies: 1)

  2. Normal Subgroups (Replies: 1)

  3. Normal Subgroups (Replies: 2)

  4. Normal subgroup (Replies: 2)