Order of Elements in a Group: A Quick Check of Understanding

  • Thread starter Thread starter Artusartos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Elements Group
Artusartos
Messages
236
Reaction score
0
I just want to check if there is anything wrong with my understanding...

Let's say we have a group of order 42 that contains Z_6. Since the group of units of Z_6 has order (3-1)(2-1), it means that we have 2 elements of order 6 in G, right? In other words, for any cyclic subgroup of order n, we just calculate the group of units to see how many elements of order n we have. Is that correct? Also, if we let P=Z_6, we can have at most 7 cyclic subgroups of order 6, since 7=42/|N(P)| (where N(P) is the normalizer of P), if N(P)=6 (which is the smallest it can be, since it has to contain Z_6). I'm just wondering if my understanding is correct.

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not right. We might have elements of order ##6## in ##G## or not, but your reasoning with the units of ##\mathbb{Z}_6## is strange. The non-units you might refer to are ##0## and ##3## and none of which has order ##6##.
 
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...
##\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...
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...
Back
Top