Why only normal subgroup is used to obtain group quotient

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of quotient groups in group theory, specifically addressing why only normal subgroups are used to form quotient groups, as opposed to any subgroup. Participants explore the implications of using non-normal subgroups and the nature of cosets.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that any subgroup can divide a group into cosets, questioning the necessity of normal subgroups for defining quotient groups.
  • Another participant clarifies that the sets of left-cosets and right-cosets of a non-normal subgroup do not form groups, emphasizing the requirement of normality for this property.
  • A different participant expresses confusion about how cosets can be groups, noting that they lack an identity element since it is included in the generating subgroup.
  • One participant explains that for cosets to form a group, the left-cosets must equal the right-cosets, which only occurs for normal subgroups, thus allowing the definition of a product on the set of cosets.
  • Another participant acknowledges the explanation and indicates that it fully addresses their question.
  • One participant mentions that even with a non-normal subgroup, the quotient can still exhibit a structure of a homogeneous space, highlighting its significance in both group theory and geometry.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the role of normal versus non-normal subgroups in forming quotient groups. While some agree on the necessity of normality for the quotient to be a group, others explore the implications and structures arising from non-normal subgroups.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the broader implications of using non-normal subgroups or the specific conditions under which cosets may or may not form groups.

SVN
Messages
49
Reaction score
1
Hello!

As far as I know any subgroup can, in principle, be used to divide group into bundle of cosets. Then any group element belongs to one of the cosets (or to the subgroup itself). And such division still is not qualified as a quotient.

Yes, the bundle of cosets in this case will be different for actions from the right and from the left (although, their number will be the same). But why is that so crucial? We have our division without intersections anyway, do we?

Is there any special name for such «one-sided (pseudo)quotients». Are there any uses for them?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For a general group G and a general (non normal) subgroup H, the set of left-cosets G/H, respectively the set of right-cosets H\G won't be groups, you need a normal subgroup (i.e. G/H = H\G) for that.
 
Not quite sure I understand how cosets can be groups themselves. They lack identity element, since it is already included in the generating subgroup (normal or non-normal).
 
You want the set of cosets to be a group (ie. the quotient group).
Say, you have a group ##G## and a subgroup ##H##. So if we want to define a product on ##G/H## (where the elements are now left-cosets), we do it like ##(aH)\cdot(bH) = (ab)H##. However, this will only make sense iff the left-cosets ##aH## are the same as the right-cosets ##Ha##, or ##aHa^{-1}=H##. Note however that for a non normal H we have ##aHa^{-1} \neq H##. This means in particular that ##(aH)\cdot(a^{-1}H)\neq (a a^{-1})H = H##. For a normal H this does work, and the rest of the group axioms are satisfied by ##G/H## with the defined product as well. Only then can we call ##G/H## a quotient group, otherwise its just a set of left-cosets.
 
Thanks a lot for such a detailed explanation. It answers my question fully.
 
In the case of nonnormal ##H##, the quotient still has a nice structure of a homogeneous space. That is, there is the obvious group action ##G## on ##G/H## by putting ##g\cdot kH = gkH##. This is an important action not only in group theory, but also in geometry since a lot of nice geometries arise as homogeneous spaces.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K