Using class equation to show that intersection is nontrivial

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Davis 97
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Class Intersection
Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44

Homework Statement


Let ##G## be a finite p-group and ##Z(G)## its center. If ##N \not = \{e\}## is a normal subgroup of ##G##, prove that ##N\cap Z(G) \not = \{e\}##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Since ##N## is a normal subgroup we can let ##G## act on ##N## by conjugation. In a manner similar to the case when ##G## acts on itself, we can construct the following class equation. Let ##n_1,\dots,n_r## be representatives of the orbits of this action not contained in ##N\cap Z(G)##. Then $$|G| = |N\cap Z(G)| + \sum_{i=1}^{r}[G : \operatorname{Stab}_G(n_i)].$$ Since some prime ##p## divides ##|G|## and ##[G : \operatorname{Stab}_G(n_i)]## for all ##i\in [1,r]##, it follows that ##p## divides ##|N\cap Z(G)|##. Hence ##N \cap Z(G) \not = \{e\}##. QED

My main question is have I explained in enough depth how I obtain the class equation that I got? Do I need to show in a rigorous way that $$|G| = |N\cap Z(G)| + \sum_{i=1}^{r}[G : \operatorname{Stab}_G(n_i)],$$ or is what I have written sufficient?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think it is sufficient.

The stabilizer formula is usually formulated for a single element. So if you like, you can show how the single element version ##|G|=|G.x|\cdot |C_G(x)|=|G:C_G(x)|\cdot |C_G(x)|## transforms into a version for entire ##N##. You used that different orbits are either disjoint or equal to obtain the sum, and that all fix points of ##N## are central. But your version is o.k.
 
  • Like
Likes Mr Davis 97
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