Permutability is not finite-intersection-closed

From Groupprops
Revision as of 19:53, 15 December 2008 by Vipul (talk | contribs)

This article gives the statement, and possibly proof, of a subgroup property (i.e., permutable subgroup) not satisfying a subgroup metaproperty (i.e., finite-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 finite-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 G and subgroups H and K of G such that H and K are both permutable subgroups (viz quasinormal subgroups) but H∩K is not.

Proof

Construction of the counterexample

Setup: Let p be an odd prime.

  • A is a group generated by two elements a,b subject to the relations ap2=1,bp=1 and ab=bap+1. Alternatively A is the semidirect product of the additive group modulo p2 by the multiplicative group of order p in the multiplicative group of automorphisms. Note that A is a non-Abelian group of order p3.
  • C is a cyclic group of order p2, generated by an element c.
  • G=A×C.
  • B={b}.

We claim that: H=A×{e}, and K=B×C={b,c}, give the required counterexample.

Proof of the claim

H=A×{e} is permutable: H is a direct factor of G so it is clearly a normal subgroup and hence a permutable subgroup.

K=B×C={b,c} is permutable: Since permutability satisfies the inverse image condition, we see that if B is permutable in A, then B×C={b,c} is permutable in G. Thus, it suffices to show that B is permutable as a subgroup of A. This can easily be checked by verifying that B commutes with all the cyclic subgroups of A. (a proof of this is provided in an example for permutable not implies normal).

B is not permutable: Consider the cyclic subgroup D generated by (a,c). The claim is that BD≠DB. To prove this notice that (a,c)(b,1)=(ab,c)=(bap+1,c). This is clearly not in BD.

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, A is a direct factor, but its intersection with C is still not a permutable subgroup.
  • A permutable subgroup of a direct factor need not be a permutable subgroup. In this case B=A∩C is a permutable subgroup inside A, which itself is a direct factor.
  • Permutability is not a direct product-closed subgroup property