Permutability is not finite-intersection-closed: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
===Proof of the claim=== | ===Proof of the claim=== | ||
<math>A</math> is a [[direct factor]] of <math>G</math> so it is clearly a [[normal subgroup]] and hence a permutable subgroup. | <math>A</math> is permutable: <math>A</math> is a [[direct factor]] of <math>G</math> so it is clearly a [[normal subgroup]] and hence a permutable subgroup. | ||
Since permutability satisfies the inverse image condition, it suffices to show that <math>B</math> is permutable as a subgroup of <math>A</math>. This can easily be checked by verifying that <math>B</math> commutes with all the cyclic subgroups of <math>A</math>. | <math>B \times C = \{ b,c \}</math> is permutable: Since permutability satisfies the inverse image condition, we see that if <math>B</math> is permutable in <math>A</math>, then <math>B \times C = \{ b, c\}</math> is permutable in <math>G</math>. Thus, it suffices to show that <math>B</math> is permutable as a subgroup of <math>A</math>. This can easily be checked by verifying that <math>B</math> commutes with all the cyclic subgroups of <math>A</math>. | ||
<math>B</math> is not permutable: Consider the cyclic subgroup <math>D</math> generated by <math>(a,c)</math>. The claim is that <math>BD \ne DB</math>. To prove this notice that <math>(a,c)(b,1) = (ab,c) = (ba^{p+1},c)</math>. This is clearly not in <math>BD</math>. | |||
==Further fact shown by the example== | ==Further fact shown by the example== | ||
Revision as of 18:53, 20 August 2008
This article gives the statement, and possibly proof, of a subgroup property (i.e., permutable subgroup) not satisfying a subgroup metaproperty (i.e., intersection-closed subgroup property).
View all subgroup metaproperty dissatisfactions | View all subgroup metaproperty satisfactions|Get help on looking up metaproperty (dis)satisfactions for subgroup properties
Get more facts about permutable subgroup|Get more facts about intersection-closed subgroup property|
Statement
Verbal statement
The intersection of two permutable subgroups of a group need not be permutable.
Symbolic statement
It is possible to find a group and subgroups and of such that and are both permutable subgroups (viz quasinormal subgroups) but is not.
Proof
Construction of the counterexample
Let A be a group generated by two elements subject to the relations and . Alternatively is the semidirect product of the additive group modulo by the multiplicative group of order in the multiplicative group of automorphisms.
Note that is a non-Abelian group of order .
Let be a cyclic group of order , generated by an element .
Set .
We claim that: and are both permutable subgroups of , but their intersection (which is just the cyclic subgroup generated by ) is not.
Proof of the claim
is permutable: is a direct factor of so it is clearly a normal subgroup and hence a permutable subgroup.
is permutable: Since permutability satisfies the inverse image condition, we see that if is permutable in , then is permutable in . Thus, it suffices to show that is permutable as a subgroup of . This can easily be checked by verifying that commutes with all the cyclic subgroups of .
is not permutable: Consider the cyclic subgroup generated by . The claim is that . To prove this notice that . This is clearly not in .
Further fact shown by the example
This example shows some further facts:
- The intersection of a permutable subgroup with a direct factor need not be a permutable subgroup. In this example, for instance, is a direct factor, but its intersection with is still not a permutable subgroup.
- A permutable subgroup of a direct factor need not be a permutable subgroup. In this case is a permutable subgroup inside , which itself is a direct factor.
- Permutability is not a direct product-closed subgroup property