Frattini's argument

From Groupprops

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

  1. Sylow implies automorph-conjugate
  2. Characteristic implies automorph-conjugate
  3. 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.