Product formula: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
* '''The map sends cosets to cosets''': Note first that if two elements are in the same coset of <math>H_1 \cap H_2</math>, they are in the same coset of <math>H_2</math>. Thus, the map sends cosets of <math>H_1 \cap H_2</math> to cosets of <math>H_2</math>. (This is fact (1)). | * '''The map sends cosets to cosets''': Note first that if two elements are in the same coset of <math>H_1 \cap H_2</math>, they are in the same coset of <math>H_2</math>. Thus, the map sends cosets of <math>H_1 \cap H_2</math> to cosets of <math>H_2</math>. (This is fact (1)). | ||
* '''The map is well-defined with the specified domain and co-domain''': Further, if <math>g \in H_1</math>, then <math>gH_2 \subseteq H_1H_2</math>. In other words, if the original coset is in <math>H_1</math>, the new coset is in <math>H_1H_2</math>. Thus, the map <math>\varphi</math> is well-defined from <math>H_1/(H_1 \cap H_2)</math> to <math>H_1H_2/H_2</math>. | * '''The map is well-defined with the specified domain and co-domain''': Further, if <math>g \in H_1</math>, then <math>gH_2 \subseteq H_1H_2</math>. In other words, if the original coset is in <math>H_1</math>, the new coset is in <math>H_1H_2</math>. Thus, the map <math>\varphi</math> is well-defined from <math>H_1/(H_1 \cap H_2)</math> to <math>H_1H_2/H_2</math>. | ||
* '''The map is injective''': Finally, <math>\varphi(a(H_1 \cap H_2)) = \varphi(b(H_1 \cap H_2))</math>. That means that <math>aH_2 = bH_2</math>, forcing <math>a^{-1}b \in H_2</math>. But we anyway have <math>a,b \in H_1</math>, so <math>a^{-1}b \in H_1 \cap H_2</math>, forcing that <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> are in the same coset of <math> | * '''The map is injective''': Finally, <math>\varphi(a(H_1 \cap H_2)) = \varphi(b(H_1 \cap H_2))</math>. That means that <math>aH_2 = bH_2</math>, forcing <math>a^{-1}b \in H_2</math>. But we anyway have <math>a,b \in H_1</math>, so <math>a^{-1}b \in H_1 \cap H_2</math>, forcing that <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> are in the same coset of <math>H_1 \cap H_2</math>. Thus, <math>a(H_1 \cap H_2) = b(H_1 \cap H_2)</math>. | ||
* '''The map is surjective''': Any left coset of <math>H_2</math> in <math>H_1H_2</math> can be written as <math>gH_2</math> where <math>g \in H_1H_2</math>. Thus, we can write <math>g = ab</math> where <math>a \in H_1, b \in H_2</math>. Then, <math>gH_2 = abH_2 = a(bH_2) = aH_2</math>, with <math>a \in H_1</math>. Thus, <math>gH_2 = \varphi(a(H_1 \cap H_2))</math>. | * '''The map is surjective''': Any left coset of <math>H_2</math> in <math>H_1H_2</math> can be written as <math>gH_2</math> where <math>g \in H_1H_2</math>. Thus, we can write <math>g = ab</math> where <math>a \in H_1, b \in H_2</math>. Then, <math>gH_2 = abH_2 = a(bH_2) = aH_2</math>, with <math>a \in H_1</math>. Thus, <math>gH_2 = \varphi(a(H_1 \cap H_2))</math>. | ||
Revision as of 13:02, 16 October 2008
This article describes a natural isomorphism between two structures or between a family of structures
Statement
Set-theoretic version
Suppose are subgroups. Then, there is a natural bijection between the left coset spaces:
.
Numerical version
Let and be two subgroups of a finite group . Then:
Here is the product of subgroups.
Related facts
- Second isomorphism theorem: This is a stronger formulation of the set-theoretic version, which holds when both the groups in the denominator are normal in the respective numerators. In this case, the natural bijection turns out to be an isomorphism.
- Index satisfies transfer inequality: This states that if , then .
- Index satisfies intersection inequality: This states that if are subgroups, then .
Facts used
- Subgroup containment implies coset containment: If are subgroups, then every left coset of is contained in a left coset of .
- Lagrange's theorem
Proof
Proof of the set-theoretic version
Given: A group , and subgroups .
To prove: There is a natural bijection between the coset spaces and .
Proof: We first define the map:
as follows:
.
In other words, it sends each coset of to the coset of containing it.
- The map sends cosets to cosets: Note first that if two elements are in the same coset of , they are in the same coset of . Thus, the map sends cosets of to cosets of . (This is fact (1)).
- The map is well-defined with the specified domain and co-domain: Further, if , then . In other words, if the original coset is in , the new coset is in . Thus, the map is well-defined from to .
- The map is injective: Finally, . That means that , forcing . But we anyway have , so , forcing that and are in the same coset of . Thus, .
- The map is surjective: Any left coset of in can be written as where . Thus, we can write where . Then, , with . Thus, .
Proof of the numerical version using the set-theoretic version
The numerical version follows by combining the set-theoretic version with Lagrange's theorem:
.
By Lagrange's theorem, the left side is and the right side is . This yields:
which, upon rearrangement, gives the product formula.