The size of the orbits of a finite normal subgroup

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves verifying a group action defined by a finite subgroup H of a group G and exploring the conditions under which H is a normal subgroup of G. The discussion centers on the relationship between orbits of the action and the size of the subgroup.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the verification of the group action and the implications of normality on the size of orbits. Questions arise regarding the interpretation of the orbit and the relationships between different subgroup products.

Discussion Status

The discussion has seen participants clarifying points about the group action and the properties of normal subgroups. Some guidance has been offered regarding the implications of the orbit sizes, and there is an acknowledgment of a misunderstanding that was addressed.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on the definitions and properties of group actions and normal subgroups, with participants questioning assumptions about the relationships between orbits and subgroup sizes.

3029298
Messages
56
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let H be a finite subgroup of a group G. Verify that the formula (h,h')(x)=hxh'-1 defines an action of H x H on G. Prove that H is a normal subgroup of G if and only if every orbit of this action contains precisely |H| points.

The Attempt at a Solution


I solved the first part of the question:
[tex]\left(\left(h,h'\right)\left(k,k'\right)\right)\left(x\right)=\left(hk,h'k'\right)\left(x\right)=hkx\left(h'k'\right)^{-1}=hkxk'^{-1}h'^{-1}=\left(h,h'\right)\left(\left(k,k'\right)\left(x\right)\right)[/tex]
This shows that the formula is a group homomorphism from H x H to G, and therefore it defines an action. But for the second part of the question I need a hint.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You may have omitted it intentionally because it's simple, but if not remember also to check (1,1)x = x to confirm that we have a group action.

The orbit of g is HgH.

If H is normal, then [itex]HgH = g^{-1}HH=g^{-1}H[/itex].

In general we have [itex]gH \subseteq HgH[/itex] and [itex]Hg \subseteq HgH[/itex]. Now if [itex]|HgH| = |H| = |gH| = |Hg|[/itex] can you conclude gH=HgH=Hg?
 
rasmhop said:
You may have omitted it intentionally because it's simple, but if not remember also to check (1,1)x = x to confirm that we have a group action.

The orbit of g is HgH.

If H is normal, then [itex]HgH = g^{-1}HH=g^{-1}H[/itex].

In general we have [itex]gH \subseteq HgH[/itex] and [itex]Hg \subseteq HgH[/itex]. Now if [itex]|HgH| = |H| = |gH| = |Hg|[/itex] can you conclude gH=HgH=Hg?

I understand the line of reasoning, only one point is unclear to me. You say that [itex]HgH = g^{-1}HH=g^{-1}H[/itex]. But shouldn't this be [itex]HgH = gHH=gH[/itex]? Because for a normal subgroup H gH=Hg for all g in G?
 
3029298 said:
I understand the line of reasoning, only one point is unclear to me. You say that [itex]HgH = g^{-1}HH=g^{-1}H[/itex]. But shouldn't this be [itex]HgH = gHH=gH[/itex]? Because for a normal subgroup H gH=Hg for all g in G?

Yes you're right.
 
Thanks! Then I understand :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
13K
Replies
7
Views
3K