Direct factor is not intersection-closed: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (2 revisions) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Statement== | ==Statement== | ||
The intersection of two direct factors of a group need not be a direct factor. | The intersection of two direct factors of a group need not be a direct factor. In fact, this property is not even true within <math>p</math>-groups. | ||
==Proof== | ==Proof== | ||
Latest revision as of 23:25, 7 May 2008
This article gives the statement, and possibly proof, of a subgroup property not satisfying a subgroup metaproperty .
View all subgroup metaproperty dissatisfactions | View all subgroup metaproperty satisfactions|Get help on looking up metaproperty (dis)satisfactions for subgroup properties
|Property "Page" (as page type) with input value "{{{property}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.Property "Page" (as page type) with input value "{{{metaproperty}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.|
Statement
The intersection of two direct factors of a group need not be a direct factor. In fact, this property is not even true within -groups.
Proof
The counterexample
Let denote the cyclic group on elements. Then, consider the group . Consider the automorphism of this group which sends the pair to . Consider the intersection of the group (which is a direct factor) with its image under . This is basically the subgroup of comprising elements which are multiples of . Clearly, this is not a direct factor, in fact it is not even a direct factor inside .