MHB Proving Finite subgroups of the multiplicative group of a field are cyclic

Deanmark
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I am looking at this proof and I am stuck on the logic that $a^{p}$ = 1. For example, consider the group under multiplication without zero, ${Z}_{5}$, wouldn't 2^4 = 1 imply that the order is 4 not 5? We know that if G is a finite abelian group, G is isomorphic to a direct product ℤ(p1)^n1×ℤ(p2)^n2×⋯×ℤ(pr)^nr where pi's are prime not necessarily distinct. Consider each of the ℤ(pi)ni as a cyclic group of oreder pnii in multiplicative notation. Let m be the lcm of all the pnii for i=1,2,…,r. Clearly m≤p1n1p2n2⋯prnr. If ai∈ℤ(pi)ni then (ai)(pini)=1 and hence ami=1. Therefore for all α∈G, whe have αm=1 that is every element of G is a root of xm=1. However G has p1n1p2n2⋯prnr elements, while the polynomial xm−1 can have at most m roots in F. So, we deduce that m=p1n1p2n2⋯prnr. Therefore pi's are distinct primes, and the group G is isomorphic to the cyclic group ℤm.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Deanmark said:
I am looking at this proof and I am stuck on the logic that $a^{p}$ = 1. For example, consider the group under multiplication without zero, ${Z}_{5}$, wouldn't 2^4 = 1 imply that the order is 4 not 5?
Hi Deanmark,

The additive subgroup of $\mathbb{Z}_5$ has indeed order $5$, but the multiplicative subgroup only contains the non-zero elements, and has order $4$.
 
castor28 said:
Hi Deanmark,

The additive subgroup of $\mathbb{Z}_5$ has indeed order $5$, but the multiplicative subgroup only contains the non-zero elements, and has order $4$.

Isn't $2^0$ the first element and $2^4$ the fifth operation which results in the identity making ${\Bbb{Z}}_{5}$ order 5? I guess this is what the proof is referring to when it claims for x in ${Z}_{d}$ $x^d = 1 $ where d is a prime power.
 
Deanmark said:
Isn't $2^0$ the first element and $2^4$ the fifth operation which results in the identity making ${\Bbb{Z}}_{5}$ order 5? I guess this is what the proof is referring to when it claims for x in ${Z}_{d}$ $x^d = 1 $ where d is a prime power.
Hi,

In $\mathbb{Z}_5$, $2^4 = 2^0 = 1$ (this is Fermat's theorem): the group only contains $4$ elements.

The $p_i$ in the proof are the prime divisors of the order of the multiplicative group under consideration. In the case of $\mathbb{Z}_5$, the complete multiplicative group has order $4$ (there is also a subgroup of order $2$). The theorem says that the group is isomorphic to $C_4$, not $C_2\times C_2$, because, otherwise, the equation $x^2 = 1$ would have four roots, which is impossible in a field.

The order of the multiplicative group (4 in this case) should not be confused with the order of the field (5). For example, the theorem also applies to proper subgroups (which is nothing new, since any subgroup of a cyclic group is cyclic). The theorem also applies in the case of a finite multiplicative subgroup of an infinite field: in $\mathbb{C}$, the n-th roots of unity constitute a finite cyclic multiplicative group.
 
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...
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...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top