Proving that a subgroup is normal.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Artusartos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Normal Subgroup
Artusartos
Messages
236
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



How can we prove that a subgroup H of Gl_2(Z_3) is normal?

These are the elements of H:

\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\1&2 \end{pmatrix}

\begin{pmatrix}1&2\\2&2 \end{pmatrix}

\begin{pmatrix}2&1\\1&1 \end{pmatrix}

\begin{pmatrix}2&2\\2&1 \end{pmatrix}

\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}

\begin{pmatrix} -1 & 0 \\0 & -1 \end{pmatrix}

\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 2 \\1& 0 \end{pmatrix}

\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\2 & 0 \end{pmatrix}

So the determinant of the elements is 1 and the trace is zero...and H additionally contains the identity element and the -identity element.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I don't think I can find the left and right cosets and show that they are equal, because there are too many elements in Gl_2(Z_3). There is a theorem in our textbook that states,

Let H be a subgroup of G. Then H is normal in G if and only if there is a group structure on the set G/H of left cosets of H with the property that the canonical map π : G → G/H is a homomorphism. If H is normal in G, then the group structure on G/H which makes π a homomorphism is unique: we must have gH · gH = ggH for all g, g ∈ G. Moreover, the kernel of π : G → G/H is H. Thus, a subgroup of G is normal if and only if it is the kernel of a homomorphism out of G.

So I'm trying to use this and show that f: Gl_2(Z_3) \rightarrow Gl_2(Z_3)/H is a homomorphism...but I'm stuck...

We know that f(a)f(b)=aHbH and that f(ab)=abH. But how can we show that aHbH=abH? Can anybody please give me a hint?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All the elements of ##H## have determinant ##1##, so H is a subgroup of ##SL_2(Z_3)##. How many subgroups of order 8 does ##SL_2(Z_3)## have?
 
jbunniii said:
All the elements of ##H## have determinant ##1##, so H is a subgroup of ##SL_2(Z_3)##. How many subgroups of order 8 does ##SL_2(Z_3)## have?

Thanks, but I didn't read about SL_2(Z_3) yet.
 
##SL_2(Z_3)## is the subgroup of ##GL_2(Z_3)## consisting of the matrices with determinant 1. What I have in mind is to try the following argument: (1) ##H## is characteristic in ##SL_2(Z_3)##; (2) ##SL_2(Z_3)## is normal in ##GL_2(Z_3)##; (3) therefore...?

In order to make that argument, you need to know the orders of ##GL_2(Z_3)## and ##SL_2(Z_3)##. Can you calculate these?
 
Last edited:
jbunniii said:
##SL_2(Z_3)## is the subgroup of ##GL_2(Z_3)## consisting of the matrices with determinant 1. What I have in mind is to try the following argument: (1) ##H## is characteristic in ##SL_2(Z_3)##; (2) ##SL_2(Z_3)## is normal in ##GL_2(Z_3)##; (3) therefore...?

In order to make that argument, you need to know the orders of ##GL_2(Z_3)## and ##SL_2(Z_3)##. Can you calculate these?

Alright, thanks :smile:
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top