This article gives the statement and possibly, proof, of an implication relation between two subgroup properties. That is, it states that every subgroup satisfying the first subgroup property (i.e., Sylow subgroup) must also satisfy the second subgroup property (i.e., subgroup whose focal subgroup equals its intersection with the commutator subgroup)
View all subgroup property implications | View all subgroup property non-implications
Get more facts about Sylow subgroup|Get more facts about subgroup whose focal subgroup equals its intersection with the commutator subgroup
Statement
Let
be a
-Sylow subgroup of a finite group
and let:
.
In other words,
is the focal subgroup of
in
.
Then:
In other words,
is a subgroup whose focal subgroup equals its intersection with the commutator subgroup.
Related facts
Facts used
For the proof using linear representation theory
- Brauer's induction theorem
For the proof using the transfer homomorphism
- Product decomposition for element in terms of transfer homomorphism
Proof
Given: A finite group
, a
-Sylow subgroup
.
is the focal subgroup of
, defined by:
.
Further, we have:
.
and:
.
To prove:
.
Initial observations
| Step no. |
Assertion/construction |
Facts used |
Given data used |
Previous steps used |
Explanation
|
| 1 |
 |
|
|
|
[SHOW MORE]The first inclusion is because every commutator of elements in  is contained inside the generating set for  , and the second inclusion is because every element in the given generating set for  is both in  and in  .
|
| 2 |
is normal in and is abelian. |
|
|
Step (1) |
This follows from the part of Step (1) that asserts that .
|
| 3 |
Let be the distinct prime divisors of with . For each , pick a -Sylow subgroup such that . |
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
Any can be expressed as a product where each is conjugate to some and the commute pairwise. |
Fact (2) |
|
Step (3) |
[SHOW MORE]Consider the cyclic group  . This is a direct product of its  -Sylow subgroups, so  can be expressed as a product of commuting elements  , one from each Sylow subgroup.  is an element of order a power of  , so by Fact (2),  is conjugate to an element  .
|
| 5 |
If (continuing notation from Step (4), though it does not really matter) is conjugate to and also conjugate to then . |
|
|
|
[SHOW MORE]Because being conjugate is an equivalence relation, and the elements  and  are both conjugate to  , they are conjugate to each other in  . Hence, by the definition of  ,  is in the generating set for  , and hence is in  .
|
| 6 |
Let be a linear character (i.e., the character of a one-dimensional representation) of whose kernel contains . The function , where is as described in Step (4), is well-defined |
|
|
Steps (4), (5) |
[SHOW MORE]The reason is that if  and  are two possibilities, then by Step (5),  , so  and hence  on account of  being multiplicative since it's a linear character.
|
| 7 |
Continuing with the notation of Step (6), is a class function on . |
|
|
|
[SHOW MORE]If  are conjugate by  , then  is the conjugate of  by  . Hence, the element  of  that we choose as conjugate to  is also conjugate to  , hence the definition of  gives the same value to  and  .
|
| 8 |
Continuing with the notation of Step (6), is a linear character of . In other words, for all . |
|
|
|
This critical step is unclear
|
| 9 |
For any linear character of whose kernel contains , there is a linear character of that extends , i.e., the restriction of to is . |
|
|
Steps (6)-(8) |
Step-combination direct, plus: [SHOW MORE]We note that if  to begin with, then  , so  . Thus, the restriction of  to  is  .
|
| 10 |
. |
|
|
|
[SHOW MORE]Suppose not. Then, we can choose a linear character  of  with kernel containing  that is nontrivial on an element of  that is outside  . However, such a character cannot be extended to a linear character of the whole group, since any linear character of the whole group must be trivial on all elements of  . On the other hand, Step (9) shows that such a character can be extended to the whole group. Our assumption thus leads to a contradiction.
|
| 11 |
. |
|
|
Steps (1), (10) |
Step-combination direct.
|
Proof using the transfer homomorphism
We have
, with
normal in
and
abelian. In particular, we can construct the transfer homomorphism
. Let
be the quotient map.
Claim: The restriction of
to
is surjective to
.
Proof: For any
, we have, by fact (1), a collection of elements
and nonnegative integers
such that
, and we have:
.
Since we chose
, and
is abelian, we can rearrange terms to obtain:
.
Every term in the second product is of the form
, which is of the form
with
conjugate in
(here
). In particular, every term in the second product is in
, and we obtain:
,
which, since
, reduces to:
.
Note now that since
is
-Sylow,
is relatively prime to
, and the map
is a bijection from
to itself. Thus,
, restricted to
, surjects to
.
Proof using the claim: Let
be the kernel of
.
Since
is a kernel of a map to an abelian group,
. Thus,
. The restriction of
to
is a bijective map from
to
(surjective by the claim, and injective because we've quotiented by the kernel). Thus, the size of
equals the size of
forcing
. In particular,
.
References
Journal references
Textbook references
- Finite Groups by Daniel Gorenstein, ISBN 0821843427, More info, Page 250, Theorem 3.4, Section 7.3 (Transfer and the focal subgroup)