I Showing that every element in G can be written a certain way

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Davis 97
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Element
Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44
Let G be a finite group which possesses an automorphism ##\sigma## that has no nontrivial fixed points and ##\sigma ^2## is the identity map. Prove that ##G## is abelian.

So there's a hint, and it tells me first to established that every element in ##G## can be written as ##x^{-1} \sigma (x)## for some ##x \in G##. I have two questions. Why does showing that ##f(x) x^{-1} \sigma (x)## is injective prove the hint, and how could I ever approach this problem without knowing the hint?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##f\, : \,x \mapsto x^{-1}\sigma(x)## is injective, then it is also surjective, because ##G## is finite, hence every element can uniquely be written in this form. For injectivity use the fact, that ##\sigma ## has only one fixed point.

How to find the trick is a difficult question. It's usually a mixture of experience, practice, fantasy, and sometimes methodology. I like to say: first list all what is given. Also a backwards approach can help: Write down the statement which has to be proven and see if there are sufficient conditions, from which it will follow. Then try to prove such a condition. This method is often the first step in very complex proofs.

For the above we had used that ##\sigma ## is a homomorphism, has only ##e## as fixed point, and that ##G## is finite. So somehow we need to use the fact, that ##\sigma^2= 1##. This means ##\sigma = \sigma^{-1}## so inverses might play a role. From your own experience you already know, that inversion together with automorphism implies commutativity, so to consider elements ##x^{-1}\sigma (x)## isn't far fetched. This is only one way, but to gather all given facts in the first place is always a good start. Unfortunately a rarely used habit, if I think about all the empty places under section 2 of our homework template. In real life one probably tries a lot of ideas and among the scribbling will turn up the solution. The expressions which can help aren't too many in this example.
 
  • Like
Likes Mr Davis 97
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...
##\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...

Similar threads

Back
Top