Classification of cyclicity-forcing numbers
This article gives a proof/explanation of the equivalence of multiple definitions for the term cyclicity-forcing number
View a complete list of pages giving proofs of equivalence of definitions
The definitions that we have to prove as equivalent
The following are equivalent for a natural number:
- There exists exactly one isomorphism class of groups of that order.
- Any group of that order is a cyclic group.
- Any group of that order is a direct product of cyclic Sylow subgroups.
- It is a product of distinct primes , such that does not divide for any prime divisors of the order.
Facts used
- Finite Abelian implies direct product of Sylow subgroups
- Finite non-Abelian and every proper subgroup is Abelian implies not simple
- Description of automorphism group of cyclic group
- Homomorphism between groups of coprime order is trivial
- Cyclic over central implies Abelian
- Lagrange's theorem
- Order of quotient group divides order of group
Proof
Equivalence of definitions (1) and (2)
This follows from two basic observations:
- For any natural number , there exists a cyclic group of order .
- Two cyclic groups of the same order are isomorphic.
Thus, the existence of only one isomorphism class of groups of a given order is equivalent to asserting that every group of that order is cyclic.
Equivalence of definitions (2) and (3)
This follows from some the Chinese remainder theorem. PLACEHOLDER FOR INFORMATION TO BE FILLED IN: [SHOW MORE]
(3) implies (4)
For this, we first prove that the number must be square-free, i.e., it is a product of distinct primes.
Suppose we have a prime factorization as follows:
.
Consider the group that is a direct product of elementary Abelian groups of order . Then, is an Abelian group of order . Further, if any of the is greater than one, then the -Sylow subgroup is not cyclic, so is not cyclic. Thus, if has a square factor, there is a non-cyclic group of order . Thus, any cyclicity-forcing number must be square-free.
We thus have:
where all the are distinct primes.
Now, suppose there exist primes and such that . Then, there exists a non-Abelian group of order , given as the semidirect product of a cyclic group of order , and a cyclic subgroup of order in its automorphism group. Let be the direct product of with a cyclic group of order . Then, is a group of order . However, is not cyclic since it has a subgroup isomorphic to , a non-cyclic group.
Thus, we're forced to have:
with not dividing for any two prime divisors of .
(4) implies (3)
Given: A group , whose order is , where the are distinct primes and does not divide for .
To prove: is cyclic.
Proof: We prove this claim by induction on . First, note that any divisor of also satisfies the condition of being square-free as well as the condition that no prime divisor of it divides any other prime divisor minus one.
- Base case of induction: The base case of induction, , is trivial.
- Induction hypothesis -- every proper subgroup of is cyclic: Every proper subgroup of has order , for some divisor of (by Lagrange's theorem, fact (6)). is square-free and satisfies the condition that for prime divisors of , does not divide . Further, , so by the inductive hypothesis, every group of order is cyclic, so the given subgroup is cyclic.
- If is Abelian, then is cyclic: If is Abelian, it is a direct product of its Sylow subgroups. Since is square-free, each of the Sylow subgroups is of prime order, hence cyclic, so is cyclic.
- If is non-Abelian, then is not simple: This follows from fact (2).
- Any proper normal subgroup of is central:
- Suppose is a proper normal subgroup of of order . Then, by fact (2), we know that is cyclic.
- Thus, the automorphism group of has order equal to the Euler-phi function of the order of . This order is .
- Further, we have a homomorphism from to given by the action by conjugation. By the assumption on , we see that the orders of is relatively prime to the order of , so by fact (4), the homomorphism is trivial. In other words, every element of acts trivially on by conjugation.
- Thus, is contained in the center of .
- If is non-Abelian, the center of is nontrivial: This follows by combining steps (4) and (5) above.
- If is non-Abelian, the quotient is cyclic: The order of the quotient group is a divisor of the order of (fact (7)), and it is a proper divisor because the center is nontrivial. Hence by the inductive hypothesis, it must be cyclic.
- is Abelian: If is non-Abelian, then is cyclic by the previous step. By fact (5), we know that any subgroup that is cyclic over the center of is Abelian, so we obtain that itself is Abelian. Thus, we find that even starting with the assumption that is non-Abelian yields that is Abelian, so must always be Abelian.
- is cyclic: This follows by combining steps (3) and (8).
References
Textbook references
- Abstract Algebra by David S. Dummit and Richard M. Foote, 10-digit ISBN 0471433349, 13-digit ISBN 978-0471433347, Page 149, Exercises 54-55, Section 4.5 (Sylow's theorem), (hints given in exercise)More info