Frattini's argument
This article describes a fact or result that is not basic but it still well-established and standard. The fact may involve terms that are themselves non-basic
View other semi-basic facts in group theory
VIEW FACTS USING THIS: directly | directly or indirectly, upto two steps | directly or indirectly, upto three steps|
VIEW: Survey articles about this
This article gives a proof/explanation of the equivalence of multiple definitions for the term automorph-conjugate subgroup
View a complete list of pages giving proofs of equivalence of definitions
Statement
For automorph-conjugate subgroups
Let be a normal subgroup of and an automorph-conjugate subgroup of . Then:
where denotes the normalizer of in .
For Sylow subgroups
Let be a normal subgroup of and a Sylow subgroup (?) of . Then:
where denotes the normalizer of in .
For characteristic subgroups of Sylow subgroups
Let be a normal subgroup of , be a Sylow subgroup of , and be a characteristic subgroup of . In other words, is a Characteristic subgroup of Sylow subgroup (?) of . Then:
.
Facts used
- Sylow implies automorph-conjugate
- Characteristic implies automorph-conjugate
- Automorph-conjugacy is transitive
Proof
Proof for automorph-conjugate subgroups
(This proof uses the left action convention)
Given: a normal subgroup of . an automorph-conjugate subgroup of .
To prove: .
Proof: Let . Consider . Since is normal, the map is an automorphism restricted to . Since is automorph-conjugate in , there exists such that .
Then, , and hence , with . thus, every element of can be expressed as the product of an element of and an element of , and we are done.
Proof for Sylow subgroups
This follows from the statement for automorph-conjugate subgroups and fact (1).
Proof for characteristic subgroups
By facts (1), (2) and (4), every characteristic subgroup of a Sylow subgroup is automorph-conjugate, so this statement again follows from the statement for automorph-conjugate subgroups.