Show that it is a normal subgroup of S4

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The subgroup \( N = \{1, (12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)\} \) is a normal subgroup of \( S_4 \) and is contained in \( A_4 \). The quotient groups satisfy \( S_4/N \cong S_3 \) and \( A_4/N \cong Z_3 \). The proof relies on the fact that conjugation preserves the structure of permutations, confirming that all elements of \( N \) are even permutations, thus establishing \( N \subseteq A_4 \). Furthermore, the orders of the groups involved are calculated using Lagrange's theorem, confirming the isomorphisms.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of group theory concepts, specifically normal subgroups.
  • Familiarity with symmetric groups, particularly \( S_4 \) and \( A_4 \).
  • Knowledge of permutation notation and cycle structure.
  • Proficiency in applying Lagrange's theorem for group order calculations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of normal subgroups in group theory.
  • Learn about the structure and properties of symmetric groups, focusing on \( S_n \) and \( A_n \).
  • Explore the concept of quotient groups and their significance in group theory.
  • Investigate the application of Lagrange's theorem in various group contexts.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of abstract algebra, and anyone interested in group theory, particularly those studying symmetric groups and their properties.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

I want to show that $N\{1, (12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)\}$ is a normal subgroup of $S_4$ that is contained in $A_4$ and that satisfies $S_4/N\cong S_3$ and $A_4/N\cong Z_3$. Let $\sigma\in S_4$.

We have the following:
$$\sigma 1 \sigma^{-1}=\sigma (1) \\ \sigma (1 2)(3 4) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (2)\right ) \left (\sigma(3) \sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (13)(24) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (3)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (14)(23) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1)\sigma (4)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (3)\right )$$

Right? (Wondering)

But how could we show that these are elements of $N$ ? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
An "easy" counting problem: the number of elements of $S_4$ that are the product of 2 disjoint 2 cycles is 3. So $N$ contains all such elements. As you have shown, conjugation preserves the length and number of cycles in any element. So $N$ is normal in $S_4$.
2 cycles are odd permutations; so the product of 2 2 cycles is even. Hence every element of $N$ is an even permutation; i.e. $N\subseteq A_4$.
$A_4/N$ is of order 3 and hence isomorphic to $Z_3$
$S_4/N$ is of order 6. Since there are only two groups of order 6 (cyclic and $S_3$), you just have to show $S_4/N$ is not cyclic. Hint: find more than 1 element of order 2 in $S_4/N$.
 
mathmari said:
Hey! :o

I want to show that $N\{1, (12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)\}$ is a normal subgroup of $S_4$ that is contained in $A_4$ and that satisfies $S_4/N\cong S_3$ and $A_4/N\cong Z_3$. Let $\sigma\in S_4$.

We have the following:
$$\sigma 1 \sigma^{-1}=\sigma (1) \\ \sigma (1 2)(3 4) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (2)\right ) \left (\sigma(3) \sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (13)(24) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (3)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (14)(23) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1)\sigma (4)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (3)\right )$$

Right? (Wondering)

But how could we show that these are elements of $N$ ? (Wondering)

Hey mathmari! (Smile)

I'd say that $\sigma 1 \sigma^{-1}=\sigma \sigma^{-1} = 1$, which is contained in $N$.

As for the others, I believe they are each 2 disjoint 2-cycles.
Are there any such permutations in $S_4$ that are missing in $N$? (Wondering)
 
johng said:
An "easy" counting problem: the number of elements of $S_4$ that are the product of 2 disjoint 2 cycles is 3. So $N$ contains all such elements. As you have shown, conjugation preserves the length and number of cycles in any element. So $N$ is normal in $S_4$.

I like Serena said:
I'd say that $\sigma 1 \sigma^{-1}=\sigma \sigma^{-1} = 1$, which is contained in $N$.

As for the others, I believe they are each 2 disjoint 2-cycles.
Are there any such permutations in $S_4$ that are missing in $N$? (Wondering)
All the possible 2-cycles of $S_4$ are the following:
$$\{\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (2)\right ) \left (\sigma(3) \sigma (4)\right ) ,\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (3)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (4)\right ) ,\left (\sigma (1)\sigma (4)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (3)\right )\} \tag 1$$

And since all the possible 2-cycles of (1 2 3 4) are the following:
$$\{(12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)\} \tag 2$$
so the elements of the set $(1)$ and the elements of the set $(2)$ must be the same.

Therefore, we have the following:
$$\sigma 1 \sigma^{-1}=\sigma \sigma^{-1}=1\in N \\ \sigma (1 2)(3 4) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (2)\right ) \left (\sigma(3) \sigma (4)\right ) \in N\\ \sigma (13)(24) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (3)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (4)\right ) \in N\\ \sigma (14)(23) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1)\sigma (4)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (3)\right ) \in N$$

Is everything correct? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
All the possible 2-cycles of $S_4$ are the following:
$$\{\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (2)\right ) \left (\sigma(3) \sigma (4)\right ) ,\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (3)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (4)\right ) ,\left (\sigma (1)\sigma (4)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (3)\right )\} \tag 1$$

Erm... those aren't 2-cycles are they? (Wondering)
They are permutations that are 2 disjoint 2-cycles.

And isn't it about them being part of $N$ rather than $S_4$? (Wondering)
 
I like Serena said:
Erm... those aren't 2-cycles are they? (Wondering)
They are permutations that are 2 disjoint 2-cycles.

(Blush)

The 2-cycles are the following:
$$(1 2), (1 3), (1 4), (2 3), (2 4), (3 4)$$
or not? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
(Blush)

The 2-cycles are the following:
$$(1 2), (1 3), (1 4), (2 3), (2 4), (3 4)$$
or not? (Wondering)

Yep! Those are all possible 2-cycles in $S_4$! (Nod)
 
I got stuck right now...

Why are $$\sigma (1 2)(3 4) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (2)\right ) \left (\sigma(3) \sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (13)(24) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (3)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (14)(23) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1)\sigma (4)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (3)\right )$$ elements of $N$ ? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
I got stuck right now...

Why are $$\sigma (1 2)(3 4) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (2)\right ) \left (\sigma(3) \sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (13)(24) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1) \sigma (3)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (4)\right ) \\ \sigma (14)(23) \sigma^{-1}=\left (\sigma (1)\sigma (4)\right )\left (\sigma (2)\sigma (3)\right )$$ elements of $N$ ? (Wondering)

Each of them are 2 disjoint 2-cycles.
And $N$ contains all 2 disjoint 2-cycles that $S_4$ contains... (Thinking)
 
  • #10
I like Serena said:
Each of them are 2 disjoint 2-cycles.
And $N$ contains all 2 disjoint 2-cycles that $S_4$ contains... (Thinking)

Ah ok... I see... (Thinking)
johng said:
2 cycles are odd permutations; so the product of 2 2 cycles is even. Hence every element of $N$ is an even permutation; i.e. $N\subseteq A_4$.
We have that $N\{1, (12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)\}$. Is $1$ also an even permutation? (Wondering)
All of $(12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)$ are even because we have at each case an even number of transpositions, $2$, right? (Wondering)
 
  • #11
mathmari said:
We have that $N\{1, (12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)\}$. Is $1$ also an even permutation? (Wondering)
All of $(12)(34), (13)(24), (14)(23)$ are even because we have at each case an even number of transpositions, $2$, right? (Wondering)

Yes, and indeed $1$ is even as well - it consists of $0$ transpositions. (Nerd)
 
  • #12
I like Serena said:
Yes, and indeed $1$ is even as well - it consists of $0$ transpositions. (Nerd)


Ah ok... (Thinking)
johng said:
$A_4/N$ is of order 3 and hence isomorphic to $Z_3$
$S_4/N$ is of order 6. Since there are only two groups of order 6 (cyclic and $S_3$), you just have to show $S_4/N$ is not cyclic. Hint: find more than 1 element of order 2 in $S_4/N$.

How do we see that $A_4/N$ is of order 3 and $S_4/N$ is of order 6? (Wondering)

Could we show that $A_4/N$ is isomorphic to $Z_3$ by defining a function and showing that it is bijective and an homomorphism. And the same for $S_4/N\cong S_3$ ? (Wondering)
 
  • #13
You know that the order of $S_4=24$ and the order of $A_4=12$. So just compute the order of a factor group as the order of the "numerator" divided by the order of the "denominator".For your second question, yes, but why work so hard?
 
  • #14
Another fundamental result on groups:

For any finite group $G$, the (left or right) cosets of a subgroup $H$ form a partition of $G$, so:

$G = \bigcup\limits_{g\in G} gH$.

If we only count each coset once, that is, we count only *distinct* cosets, then this is a disjoint union:

$G = \coprod\limits_i g_iH$

so that $|G| = |H| + |g_1H| + |g_2H| + \cdots + |g_{n-1}H|$, where each of these (left) cosets is distinct, and $G$ has $n$ cosets.

Since the mapping $L_{g_i}:G \to G$ given by $L_{g_i}(x) = g_ix$ is bijective for every $g_i \in G$, we have for any $g_i$ that $|g_iH| = |H|$ and so:

$|G| = n\cdot|H|$.

This is usually how Lagrange's theorem is proven. The number $n$ (the number of cosets) is called the *index* of $H$ in $G$, and is written $[G:H]$. We thus have:

$|G| = [G:H]\cdot |H|$.

If $H$ is a normal subgroup, so that $G/H$ is a group under coset multiplication, we have:

$|G/H| = [G:H] = \dfrac{|G|}{|H|}$.
 
  • #15
We have that $|S_4|=4!=24$ and $|N|=4$ (since $N$ contains $4$ elements), then $|S_4/N|=\frac{|S_4|}{|N|}=\frac{24}{4}=6$, since we have shown that $N$ is a normal subgroup of $S_4$.

The only groups of order $6$ are the cyclic one and $S_3$.

johng said:
$S_4/N$ is of order 6. Since there are only two groups of order 6 (cyclic and $S_3$), you just have to show $S_4/N$ is not cyclic. Hint: find more than 1 element of order 2 in $S_4/N$.

Why do we have to find more than 1 element of order 2 in $S_4/N$ to show that $S_4/N$ is not cyclic?
Deveno said:
If $H$ is a normal subgroup, so that $G/H$ is a group under coset multiplication, we have:

$|G/H| = [G:H] = \dfrac{|G|}{|H|}$.

To apply this formula at the calculation of the order of $A_4/N$ do we have to show that $N$ is a normal subgroup of $A_4$ ? (Wondering)
 
  • #16
mathmari said:
We have that $|S_4|=4!=24$ and $|N|=4$ (since $N$ contains $4$ elements), then $|S_4/N|=\frac{|S_4|}{|N|}=\frac{24}{4}=6$, since we have shown that $N$ is a normal subgroup of $S_4$.

The only groups of order $6$ are the cyclic one and $S_3$.



Why do we have to find more than 1 element of order 2 in $S_4/N$ to show that $S_4/N$ is not cyclic?

Cyclic groups have exactly one subgroup of order $d$, for each divisor $d$ of the order of the group. In particular, they have only one subgroup of order $2$ if the order of the group is even, and thus only one element of order $2$. For a cyclic group $\langle a\rangle$ where $a$ has order $6$, this element is $a^3$.


To apply this formula at the calculation of the order of $A_4/N$ do we have to show that $N$ is a normal subgroup of $A_4$ ? (Wondering)

Yes, and no-the number of cosets (right or left) of $N$ in $A_4$ is still $|A_4|/|N|$ whether or not $N$ is normal, but $A_4/N$ is only a GROUP (that is, coset multiplication is a well-defined binary operation on cosets) if $N$ is normal.

Fortunately for you, there is nothing to prove, because of this:

If $H \lhd G$, then $H \lhd K$ for every subgroup $K$ of $G$ containing $H$.

Proof:

Since $H \lhd G$, we have $gHg^{-1} \subseteq H$ for ANY $g \in G$. If $k \in K$, then since $K$ is a subgroup of $G$, then $k \in G$, so $kHk^{-1} \subseteq H$. Since $K$ contains $H$, $H$ is thus a normal subgroup of $K$.
 
  • #17
Deveno said:
Cyclic groups have exactly one subgroup of order $d$, for each divisor $d$ of the order of the group. In particular, they have only one subgroup of order $2$ if the order of the group is even, and thus only one element of order $2$.

I understand! (Yes)
johng said:
find more than 1 element of order 2 in $S_4/N$
Are the elments of $S_4/N$ the 3-cycles of $S_4$ ? (Wondering)
 
  • #18
mathmari said:
I understand! (Yes)
Are the elments of $S_4/N$ the 3-cycles of $S_4$ ? (Wondering)

No, the elements of $S_4/N$ are not even elements of $S_4$, they are cosets of $N$, that is to say equivalence classes of elements of $S_4$ under the equivalence relation:

$\sigma_1 \sim \sigma_2 \iff \sigma_2^{-1}\sigma_1 \in N$.

Let's enumerate these cosets, explicitly.

The first coset is, of course, $N$ itself:

$N = eN = \{e,(1\ 2)(3\ 4), (1\ 3)(2\ 4), (1\ 4)(2\ 3)\}$.

Since $(1\ 2) \not\in N$, this is another distinct coset:

$(1\ 2)N = \{(1\ 2), (3\ 4), (1\ 3\ 2\ 4), (1\ 4\ 2\ 3)\}$.

Since $(1\ 3) \not\in N, (1\ 2)N$, this gives us a 3rd coset:

$(1\ 3)N = \{(1\ 3), (1\ 2\ 3\ 4), (2\ 4), (1\ 4\ 3\ 2)\}$.

None of these three cosets contain $(2\ 3)$, giving us a 4th coset:

$(2\ 3)N = \{(2\ 3), (1\ 3\ 4\ 2), (1\ 2\ 4\ 3), (1\ 4)\}$

Note none of our cosets yet contain a $3$-cycle, so:

$(1\ 2\ 3)N$ is a 5th coset:

$(1\ 2\ 3)N = \{(1\ 2\ 3), (1\ 3\ 4), (2\ 4\ 3), (1\ 4\ 2)\}$

The last coset consists of those elements of $S_4$ we haven't listed yet:

$(1\ 3\ 2)N = \{(1\ 3\ 2), (2\ 3\ 4), (1\ 2\ 4), (1\ 4\ 3)\}$.

This particular set of "representatives" (the elements we put to the left of $N$) makes it clear $S_4/N \cong S_3$.
 
  • #19
Deveno said:
No, the elements of $S_4/N$ are not even elements of $S_4$, they are cosets of $N$, that is to say equivalence classes of elements of $S_4$ under the equivalence relation:

$\sigma_1 \sim \sigma_2 \iff \sigma_2^{-1}\sigma_1 \in N$.

Ah ok... (Thinking)
Deveno said:
Since $(1\ 2) \not\in N$, this is another distinct coset:

$(1\ 2)N = \{(1\ 2), (3\ 4), (1\ 3\ 2\ 4), (1\ 4\ 2\ 3)\}$.

Why does the element $(1 \ 2 )(3 \ 4)$ of $N$ become $(3 4)$ at $(1\ 2)N$ ? (Wondering)
 
  • #20
mathmari said:
Why does the element $(1 \ 2 )(3 \ 4)$ of $N$ become $(3 4)$ at $(1\ 2)N$ ? (Wondering)

Erm... isn't $(1 2) \circ (1 2)(3 4) = (3 4)$? (Wondering)
 
  • #21
I like Serena said:
Erm... isn't $(1 2) \circ (1 2)(3 4) = (3 4)$? (Wondering)
Why? I got stuck right now... (Wondering) (Sweating)
 
  • #22
mathmari said:
Why? I got stuck right now... (Wondering) (Sweating)

Where are you stuck? How would you evaluate $(12)\circ (12)(34)$? (Wondering)

Those permutations bring $1$ to $2$ and back and separately from that, it brings $3$ to $4$.
 
  • #23
$(1\ 2)(3\ 4)$ is this mapping:

$1 \to 2$
$2 \to 1$
$3 \to 4$
$4 \to 3$

$(1\ 2)(1\ 2)(3\ 4)$ is this mapping:

$1 \to 2 \to 1$
$2 \to 1 \to 2$
$3 \to 4 \to 4$
$4 \to 3 \to 3$, which "collapses" to:$1 \to 1$
$2 \to 2$
$3 \to 4$
$4 \to 3$,

which is the mapping $(3\ 4)$.

Tl, dr; version: $(1\ 2)$ is its own inverse.
 
  • #24
I like Serena said:
Those permutations bring $1$ to $2$ and back and separately from that, it brings $3$ to $4$.

Deveno said:
$(1\ 2)(3\ 4)$ is this mapping:

$1 \to 2$
$2 \to 1$
$3 \to 4$
$4 \to 3$

$(1\ 2)(1\ 2)(3\ 4)$ is this mapping:

$1 \to 2 \to 1$
$2 \to 1 \to 2$
$3 \to 4 \to 4$
$4 \to 3 \to 3$, which "collapses" to:$1 \to 1$
$2 \to 2$
$3 \to 4$
$4 \to 3$,

which is the mapping $(3\ 4)$.

Tl, dr; version: $(1\ 2)$ is its own inverse.
I understand! Thanks for explaining! (Smile)

Deveno said:
This particular set of "representatives" (the elements we put to the left of $N$) makes it clear $S_4/N \cong S_3$.

Do we not look at the set of the elements that the cosets contain, just at the element $g$ of the cosets $gN$ ? Why? (Wondering)
 
  • #25
mathmari said:
I understand! Thanks for explaining! (Smile)



Do we not look at the set of the elements that the cosets contain, just at the element $g$ of the cosets $gN$ ? Why? (Wondering)

Yes we look at the cosets, the equivalence class of $g$, for example is $[g] = gN$.

You may find it educational to convince yourself that if $g_1 \in gN$, and $g_2 \in hN$, that $g_1g_2 \in (gh)N$.

*That* is why we usually just look at "representatives".
 
  • #26
Deveno said:
No, the elements of $S_4/N$ are not even elements of $S_4$, they are cosets of $N$, that is to say equivalence classes of elements of $S_4$ under the equivalence relation:

$\sigma_1 \sim \sigma_2 \iff \sigma_2^{-1}\sigma_1 \in N$.

Let's enumerate these cosets, explicitly.

The first coset is, of course, $N$ itself:

$N = eN = \{e,(1\ 2)(3\ 4), (1\ 3)(2\ 4), (1\ 4)(2\ 3)\}$.

Since $(1\ 2) \not\in N$, this is another distinct coset:

$(1\ 2)N = \{(1\ 2), (3\ 4), (1\ 3\ 2\ 4), (1\ 4\ 2\ 3)\}$.

Since $(1\ 3) \not\in N, (1\ 2)N$, this gives us a 3rd coset:

$(1\ 3)N = \{(1\ 3), (1\ 2\ 3\ 4), (2\ 4), (1\ 4\ 3\ 2)\}$.

None of these three cosets contain $(2\ 3)$, giving us a 4th coset:

$(2\ 3)N = \{(2\ 3), (1\ 3\ 4\ 2), (1\ 2\ 4\ 3), (1\ 4)\}$

Note none of our cosets yet contain a $3$-cycle, so:

$(1\ 2\ 3)N$ is a 5th coset:

$(1\ 2\ 3)N = \{(1\ 2\ 3), (1\ 3\ 4), (2\ 4\ 3), (1\ 4\ 2)\}$

The last coset consists of those elements of $S_4$ we haven't listed yet:

$(1\ 3\ 2)N = \{(1\ 3\ 2), (2\ 3\ 4), (1\ 2\ 4), (1\ 4\ 3)\}$.

This particular set of "representatives" (the elements we put to the left of $N$) makes it clear $S_4/N \cong S_3$.
If we took at the beginning for example the coset $(14)N$, would it also be $S_4/N \cong S_3$ ? (Wondering)
 
  • #27
mathmari said:
If we took at the beginning for example the coset $(14)N$, would it also be $S_4/N \cong S_3$ ? (Wondering)

Why don't you try using different "representatives" and make a Cayley table? Let me know your observations.
 
  • #28
johng said:
$S_4/N$ is of order 6. Since there are only two groups of order 6 (cyclic and $S_3$), you just have to show $S_4/N$ is not cyclic. Hint: find more than 1 element of order 2 in $S_4/N$.

Do we have to find all the cosets, as in post #18, to show that in $S_4/N$ there are more than $1$ element of order $2$ ? (Wondering)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
12K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K