Every group is isoclinic to a stem group

From Groupprops
Revision as of 01:19, 19 January 2013 by Vipul (talk | contribs) (→‎Proof)

Statement

Suppose G is a group. Then, there exists a group H such that:

  1. H is a stem group, i.e., Z(H)[H,H].
  2. G and H are isoclinic groups.

Related facts

Proof

Given: A group G.

To prove: There exists a group H such that G is isoclinic to H, and Z(H)[H,H].

Proof: Let Z=Z(G) be the center of G, and let W=ZG. First, consider the short exact sequence:

0ZGG/Z1

Consider the short exact sequence that gives the Formula for second cohomology group for trivial group action in terms of Schur multiplier and abelianization.

0operatornameExt1((G/Z)ab;Z)H2(G/Z;Z)Hom(H2(G/Z;Z),Z)0

The group G can be viewed as giving rise to an element of H2(G/Z;Z), which, under the mapping, gives an element of Hom(H2(G/Z;mathbZ),Z). It turns out from the constriction (see the formula page) that the image of the mapping must necessarily lie in the subgroup ZG. In fact, the image of the homomorphism is precisely ZG. Thus, in fact, we get an element of Hom(H2(G/Z;Z),ZG).

Now, consider the short exact sequence for the formula for second cohomology group for trivial group action in terms of Schur multiplier and abelianization with ZG used in place of Z as the central subgroup:

0operatornameExt1((G/Z)ab;ZG)H2(G/Z;ZG)Hom(H2(G/Z;Z),ZG)0

Because we know the right map is surjective, we can find an element of H2(G/Z;ZG) that maps to the element obtained above in Hom(H2(G/Z;Z),ZG). Denote the corresponding extension group by H. We claim that:

  • H is isoclinic to G: In fact, the central subgroup for the extension used to construct H is precisely the center of H.
  • Z(H)H: We know that the image of the mapping in Hom(H2(G/Z;Z),ZG) is surjective to the central subgroup, and also that the image is contained in the derived subgroup, so Z(H)H.

References

Journal references

  • The classification of prime-power groups by Philip Hall, Volume 69, (Year 1937): Official linkMore info: The assertion is made without an explicit proof, but the reasoning for the proof is given in preceding paragraphs, with the backdrop assumption of finiteness.