Prove Centralizer Equality: n & k Relatively Prime

  • Thread starter Thread starter tyrannosaurus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving the equality of centralizers C(a) and C(a^k) in a group G when the order of element a, denoted |a|=n, and the integer k are relatively prime. The key equation used is ns + kt = 1, which indicates the existence of integers s and t that facilitate the proof. Participants suggest using double containment to establish the relationship between the centralizers, specifically showing that if b is in C(a^k), then b must also be in C(a).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of group theory, specifically centralizers in groups.
  • Familiarity with the concept of relatively prime integers.
  • Knowledge of proof techniques, including double containment and proof by contradiction.
  • Basic understanding of group element orders and their implications.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of centralizers in group theory.
  • Learn about the implications of relatively prime integers in algebraic structures.
  • Explore proof techniques in abstract algebra, focusing on double containment methods.
  • Investigate examples of groups and their centralizers to solidify understanding.
USEFUL FOR

Students of abstract algebra, mathematicians interested in group theory, and anyone studying the properties of centralizers and their applications in mathematical proofs.

tyrannosaurus
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If a is an element of a group and |a|=n, prove that C(a)=C(a^k) when k is relatively prime to n.


Homework Equations


If n and k are relatively prime, then there exists integers s and t such that ns+kt=1.
The centralizer a in G, C(a) is the set of all elements in a group G that commute with a. C(a)={g an element of G|ga-ag}


The Attempt at a Solution


I tried proving it by double containment, but I couldn't show that C(a^K) is contained in C(a). Should I try a proof by contradiction? I will be grateful for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tyrannosaurus said:

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried proving it by double containment, but I couldn't show that C(a^K) is contained in C(a).

I think double containment is the easiest method (I have never heard the term double containment, but I'm assuming it refers to proving C(a) \subseteq C(a^K) and C(a^K) \subseteq C(a)).

You want to show that if b is in C(a^K), then b is in C(a). In other words assume:
ba^Kb^{-1} = a^K[/itex]<br /> i.e. a^K and b commute. You then wish to show bab^{-1}=a. Here I have just stated the goal so we&#039;re clear about that.<br /> <br /> To say that K and n are relatively prime is equivalent to saying that there exists integers x, y such that xK+yn=1. Now you have:<br /> (bab^{-1})^1 = (bab^{-1})^{xK+yn}<br /> so it suffices to show:<br /> (bab^{-1})^{xK+yn} = a<br /> See if you can do this. Remember that you have:<br /> ba^K b^{-1} = a^K \qquad a^n = 1
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K