Classification of groups of order 12Give all groups of cardinality 12.General affine group of degree one on...

Is divisi notation needed for brass or woodwind in an orchestra?

How can a new country break out from a developed country without war?

I keep switching characters, how do I stop?

What should be the ideal length of sentences in a blog post for ease of reading?

Asserting that Atheism and Theism are both faith based positions

Calculate Pi using Monte Carlo

Can you describe someone as luxurious? As in someone who likes luxurious things?

Air travel with refrigerated insulin

Hashing password to increase entropy

A seasonal riddle

Why do Radio Buttons not fill the entire outer circle?

If the Dominion rule using their Jem'Hadar troops, why is their life expectancy so low?

Magnifying glass in hyperbolic space

How to track Account Description field changes in Field history Tracking?

Writing in a Christian voice

Non-Borel set in arbitrary metric space

How to get directions in deep space?

"Marked down as someone wanting to sell shares." What does that mean?

Are hand made posters acceptable in Academia?

Connection Between Knot Theory and Number Theory

Reason why a kingside attack is not justified

Relations between homogeneous polynomials

Turning a hard to access nut?

Why didn't Voldemort know what Grindelwald looked like?



Classification of groups of order 12


Give all groups of cardinality 12.General affine group of degree one on field of order 4Simple groups of order 168Groups of order 42 and classification.Sylow subgroups and classification…why is this proof true?Groups of order 24.$lvert Grvert=24$ not simple by a counting argumentscalculate the number of sylow p subgroups of a5Groups of order 36Groups of order 36 - another step in lemma 5.4.If $|G| = 120$ then $G$ has a subgroup of index $3$ or $5$ (or both)Let $G$ be the group $S_4times S_3$ .Prove that $G$ has a normal subgroup of order $72$.













3












$begingroup$


I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.



Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)



(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?). Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either), and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)
So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)
Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).



Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You don't get that the order of $P_3$ is $3$?
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:06










  • $begingroup$
    I get that a $P_3$ would have order a power of 3, but that could be 1, 3 or 9.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:07












  • $begingroup$
    Okay, @DerekHolt so by Lagrange, 9 cannot divide 12 and if it were 1, then we could not have 4 unique p-subgroups.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 26 '15 at 3:07










  • $begingroup$
    I think you need to understand Sylow's Theorem better before you can attempt this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 26 '15 at 8:38
















3












$begingroup$


I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.



Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)



(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?). Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either), and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)
So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)
Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).



Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You don't get that the order of $P_3$ is $3$?
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:06










  • $begingroup$
    I get that a $P_3$ would have order a power of 3, but that could be 1, 3 or 9.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:07












  • $begingroup$
    Okay, @DerekHolt so by Lagrange, 9 cannot divide 12 and if it were 1, then we could not have 4 unique p-subgroups.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 26 '15 at 3:07










  • $begingroup$
    I think you need to understand Sylow's Theorem better before you can attempt this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 26 '15 at 8:38














3












3








3


0



$begingroup$


I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.



Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)



(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?). Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either), and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)
So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)
Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).



Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.



Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)



(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?). Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either), and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)
So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)
Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).



Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.







group-theory finite-groups groups-enumeration






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 5 '16 at 20:31









Alexander Konovalov

5,24221957




5,24221957










asked Nov 25 '15 at 22:42









user2193268user2193268

589




589












  • $begingroup$
    You don't get that the order of $P_3$ is $3$?
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:06










  • $begingroup$
    I get that a $P_3$ would have order a power of 3, but that could be 1, 3 or 9.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:07












  • $begingroup$
    Okay, @DerekHolt so by Lagrange, 9 cannot divide 12 and if it were 1, then we could not have 4 unique p-subgroups.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 26 '15 at 3:07










  • $begingroup$
    I think you need to understand Sylow's Theorem better before you can attempt this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 26 '15 at 8:38


















  • $begingroup$
    You don't get that the order of $P_3$ is $3$?
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:06










  • $begingroup$
    I get that a $P_3$ would have order a power of 3, but that could be 1, 3 or 9.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 25 '15 at 23:07












  • $begingroup$
    Okay, @DerekHolt so by Lagrange, 9 cannot divide 12 and if it were 1, then we could not have 4 unique p-subgroups.
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Nov 26 '15 at 3:07










  • $begingroup$
    I think you need to understand Sylow's Theorem better before you can attempt this problem.
    $endgroup$
    – Derek Holt
    Nov 26 '15 at 8:38
















$begingroup$
You don't get that the order of $P_3$ is $3$?
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 25 '15 at 23:06




$begingroup$
You don't get that the order of $P_3$ is $3$?
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 25 '15 at 23:06












$begingroup$
I get that a $P_3$ would have order a power of 3, but that could be 1, 3 or 9.
$endgroup$
– user2193268
Nov 25 '15 at 23:07






$begingroup$
I get that a $P_3$ would have order a power of 3, but that could be 1, 3 or 9.
$endgroup$
– user2193268
Nov 25 '15 at 23:07














$begingroup$
Okay, @DerekHolt so by Lagrange, 9 cannot divide 12 and if it were 1, then we could not have 4 unique p-subgroups.
$endgroup$
– user2193268
Nov 26 '15 at 3:07




$begingroup$
Okay, @DerekHolt so by Lagrange, 9 cannot divide 12 and if it were 1, then we could not have 4 unique p-subgroups.
$endgroup$
– user2193268
Nov 26 '15 at 3:07












$begingroup$
I think you need to understand Sylow's Theorem better before you can attempt this problem.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 26 '15 at 8:38




$begingroup$
I think you need to understand Sylow's Theorem better before you can attempt this problem.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 26 '15 at 8:38










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.




It seems that there is a mistake here one should read $p nshortmid m$ or $gcd(p,m)=1$.




Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)




A priori, it has no reason to be true but this is a theorem known as $textit{the first Sylow's theorem}$. It states that for any finite group $G$ and $p$ a prime number dividing $|G|$, if we write $|G|=p^rm$ with $p nshortmid m$ then $G$ admits a $p$-Sylow (which is defined as a subgroup of $G$ whose cardinal is $p^r$).




(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?).




How is $f$ defined ? Since it is given by the conjugation action $f(g):=Smapsto gSg^{-1}$ so that if $f(g)$ is trivial (the indentity function here), it follows that $f(g)$ sends any $S$ to $S$ since $f(g)$ also sends any $S$ to $gSg^{-1}$ this boils down to for all $S$ we have $S=gSg^{-1}$.




Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either)




This is the very definition of a $3$-Sylow in $G$ that gives you this since $|G|=12=4times 3$.




, and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)




Since $G$ acts transitively by conjugation (this is your point 2 : $p$-Sylow are all conjugate to each other) we have by the first class formula :



$$frac{|G|}{n_3(G)}=|N_G(P_3)|text{ whence } |N_G(P_3)|=3$$



By definition $Hsubseteq N_G(H)$ so that $P_3subseteq N_G(P_3)$ since both are of cardinal $3$ they are equal.




So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)




We already saw that $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of normalizers of $3$-Sylows. Now we just saw that the normalizer of a $3$-Sylow is exactly the $3$-Sylow itself. Now I claim that if $S$ and $T$ are two different $3$-Sylows they cannot but intersect trivially. Indeed by Lagrange $Scap T$ has cardinal dividing $|S|=3$. So the cardinal is either $3$ or $1$, if $|Scap T|=3$ then $Scap Tsubseteq S$ and $|S|=3$ implies that $Scap T=S$ and then that $Ssubseteq T$ which implies (with the cardinal) that $S=T$ which is impossible. It follows that $|Scap T|=1$ i.e. $Scap T$ is trivial.



Since $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of $4$ different $3$-Sylows it is necessarily trivial.




Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).




Since $Ker(f)$ has been proven to be trivial it follows that $G$ is isomorphic to $f(G)$ which is a subgroup of $S_4$. Now you would like to identify the subgroup $f(G)$ you know that it contains $4$ $3$-Sylows. A $3$-Sylow is of order $3$, it contains two elements of order $3$ and one of order $1$. Since the intersection of two different $3$-Sylows is trivial and since you have $4$ $3$-Sylows you finally get in $f(G)$ exactly $8$ elements of order $3$ in $f(G)$. Since they are elements of order $3$ in $S_4$ they cannot but be $3$-cycles and since there are $8$ of them in $S_4$ they are all contained in $f(G)$. The fact that they generate $A_4$ is classical so that $A_4leq f(G)$ and by cardinality argument they are equal.



This part is too complicated, one way to define $A_n$ is to say that this is the unique subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$. Since $S_4$ is of order $24$ and $f(G)$ of order $12$ it follows that $f(G)$ is a subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$ and then $A_4=f(G)$ by unicity.




Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I think it'd be clearer if your input was in plain text and the original text highlighted.
    $endgroup$
    – lhf
    Nov 27 '15 at 11:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ClémentGuérin Thanks a lot for your help! I went through all of it, slowly and I understand it now. There is one last thought left: Since they are elements of order 3 in S4 they cannot but be 3-cycles. Is it true that 4-cycle can't be of order 3?
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Dec 1 '15 at 20:51










  • $begingroup$
    @user2193268, in general, in $S_n$ a $k$-cycle is of order $k$,it is a general property that directly comes from the definition of a $k$-cycle.
    $endgroup$
    – Clément Guérin
    Dec 2 '15 at 7:31











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1546577%2fclassification-of-groups-of-order-12%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2












$begingroup$

I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.




It seems that there is a mistake here one should read $p nshortmid m$ or $gcd(p,m)=1$.




Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)




A priori, it has no reason to be true but this is a theorem known as $textit{the first Sylow's theorem}$. It states that for any finite group $G$ and $p$ a prime number dividing $|G|$, if we write $|G|=p^rm$ with $p nshortmid m$ then $G$ admits a $p$-Sylow (which is defined as a subgroup of $G$ whose cardinal is $p^r$).




(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?).




How is $f$ defined ? Since it is given by the conjugation action $f(g):=Smapsto gSg^{-1}$ so that if $f(g)$ is trivial (the indentity function here), it follows that $f(g)$ sends any $S$ to $S$ since $f(g)$ also sends any $S$ to $gSg^{-1}$ this boils down to for all $S$ we have $S=gSg^{-1}$.




Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either)




This is the very definition of a $3$-Sylow in $G$ that gives you this since $|G|=12=4times 3$.




, and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)




Since $G$ acts transitively by conjugation (this is your point 2 : $p$-Sylow are all conjugate to each other) we have by the first class formula :



$$frac{|G|}{n_3(G)}=|N_G(P_3)|text{ whence } |N_G(P_3)|=3$$



By definition $Hsubseteq N_G(H)$ so that $P_3subseteq N_G(P_3)$ since both are of cardinal $3$ they are equal.




So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)




We already saw that $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of normalizers of $3$-Sylows. Now we just saw that the normalizer of a $3$-Sylow is exactly the $3$-Sylow itself. Now I claim that if $S$ and $T$ are two different $3$-Sylows they cannot but intersect trivially. Indeed by Lagrange $Scap T$ has cardinal dividing $|S|=3$. So the cardinal is either $3$ or $1$, if $|Scap T|=3$ then $Scap Tsubseteq S$ and $|S|=3$ implies that $Scap T=S$ and then that $Ssubseteq T$ which implies (with the cardinal) that $S=T$ which is impossible. It follows that $|Scap T|=1$ i.e. $Scap T$ is trivial.



Since $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of $4$ different $3$-Sylows it is necessarily trivial.




Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).




Since $Ker(f)$ has been proven to be trivial it follows that $G$ is isomorphic to $f(G)$ which is a subgroup of $S_4$. Now you would like to identify the subgroup $f(G)$ you know that it contains $4$ $3$-Sylows. A $3$-Sylow is of order $3$, it contains two elements of order $3$ and one of order $1$. Since the intersection of two different $3$-Sylows is trivial and since you have $4$ $3$-Sylows you finally get in $f(G)$ exactly $8$ elements of order $3$ in $f(G)$. Since they are elements of order $3$ in $S_4$ they cannot but be $3$-cycles and since there are $8$ of them in $S_4$ they are all contained in $f(G)$. The fact that they generate $A_4$ is classical so that $A_4leq f(G)$ and by cardinality argument they are equal.



This part is too complicated, one way to define $A_n$ is to say that this is the unique subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$. Since $S_4$ is of order $24$ and $f(G)$ of order $12$ it follows that $f(G)$ is a subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$ and then $A_4=f(G)$ by unicity.




Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I think it'd be clearer if your input was in plain text and the original text highlighted.
    $endgroup$
    – lhf
    Nov 27 '15 at 11:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ClémentGuérin Thanks a lot for your help! I went through all of it, slowly and I understand it now. There is one last thought left: Since they are elements of order 3 in S4 they cannot but be 3-cycles. Is it true that 4-cycle can't be of order 3?
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Dec 1 '15 at 20:51










  • $begingroup$
    @user2193268, in general, in $S_n$ a $k$-cycle is of order $k$,it is a general property that directly comes from the definition of a $k$-cycle.
    $endgroup$
    – Clément Guérin
    Dec 2 '15 at 7:31
















2












$begingroup$

I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.




It seems that there is a mistake here one should read $p nshortmid m$ or $gcd(p,m)=1$.




Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)




A priori, it has no reason to be true but this is a theorem known as $textit{the first Sylow's theorem}$. It states that for any finite group $G$ and $p$ a prime number dividing $|G|$, if we write $|G|=p^rm$ with $p nshortmid m$ then $G$ admits a $p$-Sylow (which is defined as a subgroup of $G$ whose cardinal is $p^r$).




(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?).




How is $f$ defined ? Since it is given by the conjugation action $f(g):=Smapsto gSg^{-1}$ so that if $f(g)$ is trivial (the indentity function here), it follows that $f(g)$ sends any $S$ to $S$ since $f(g)$ also sends any $S$ to $gSg^{-1}$ this boils down to for all $S$ we have $S=gSg^{-1}$.




Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either)




This is the very definition of a $3$-Sylow in $G$ that gives you this since $|G|=12=4times 3$.




, and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)




Since $G$ acts transitively by conjugation (this is your point 2 : $p$-Sylow are all conjugate to each other) we have by the first class formula :



$$frac{|G|}{n_3(G)}=|N_G(P_3)|text{ whence } |N_G(P_3)|=3$$



By definition $Hsubseteq N_G(H)$ so that $P_3subseteq N_G(P_3)$ since both are of cardinal $3$ they are equal.




So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)




We already saw that $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of normalizers of $3$-Sylows. Now we just saw that the normalizer of a $3$-Sylow is exactly the $3$-Sylow itself. Now I claim that if $S$ and $T$ are two different $3$-Sylows they cannot but intersect trivially. Indeed by Lagrange $Scap T$ has cardinal dividing $|S|=3$. So the cardinal is either $3$ or $1$, if $|Scap T|=3$ then $Scap Tsubseteq S$ and $|S|=3$ implies that $Scap T=S$ and then that $Ssubseteq T$ which implies (with the cardinal) that $S=T$ which is impossible. It follows that $|Scap T|=1$ i.e. $Scap T$ is trivial.



Since $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of $4$ different $3$-Sylows it is necessarily trivial.




Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).




Since $Ker(f)$ has been proven to be trivial it follows that $G$ is isomorphic to $f(G)$ which is a subgroup of $S_4$. Now you would like to identify the subgroup $f(G)$ you know that it contains $4$ $3$-Sylows. A $3$-Sylow is of order $3$, it contains two elements of order $3$ and one of order $1$. Since the intersection of two different $3$-Sylows is trivial and since you have $4$ $3$-Sylows you finally get in $f(G)$ exactly $8$ elements of order $3$ in $f(G)$. Since they are elements of order $3$ in $S_4$ they cannot but be $3$-cycles and since there are $8$ of them in $S_4$ they are all contained in $f(G)$. The fact that they generate $A_4$ is classical so that $A_4leq f(G)$ and by cardinality argument they are equal.



This part is too complicated, one way to define $A_n$ is to say that this is the unique subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$. Since $S_4$ is of order $24$ and $f(G)$ of order $12$ it follows that $f(G)$ is a subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$ and then $A_4=f(G)$ by unicity.




Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I think it'd be clearer if your input was in plain text and the original text highlighted.
    $endgroup$
    – lhf
    Nov 27 '15 at 11:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ClémentGuérin Thanks a lot for your help! I went through all of it, slowly and I understand it now. There is one last thought left: Since they are elements of order 3 in S4 they cannot but be 3-cycles. Is it true that 4-cycle can't be of order 3?
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Dec 1 '15 at 20:51










  • $begingroup$
    @user2193268, in general, in $S_n$ a $k$-cycle is of order $k$,it is a general property that directly comes from the definition of a $k$-cycle.
    $endgroup$
    – Clément Guérin
    Dec 2 '15 at 7:31














2












2








2





$begingroup$

I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.




It seems that there is a mistake here one should read $p nshortmid m$ or $gcd(p,m)=1$.




Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)




A priori, it has no reason to be true but this is a theorem known as $textit{the first Sylow's theorem}$. It states that for any finite group $G$ and $p$ a prime number dividing $|G|$, if we write $|G|=p^rm$ with $p nshortmid m$ then $G$ admits a $p$-Sylow (which is defined as a subgroup of $G$ whose cardinal is $p^r$).




(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?).




How is $f$ defined ? Since it is given by the conjugation action $f(g):=Smapsto gSg^{-1}$ so that if $f(g)$ is trivial (the indentity function here), it follows that $f(g)$ sends any $S$ to $S$ since $f(g)$ also sends any $S$ to $gSg^{-1}$ this boils down to for all $S$ we have $S=gSg^{-1}$.




Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either)




This is the very definition of a $3$-Sylow in $G$ that gives you this since $|G|=12=4times 3$.




, and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)




Since $G$ acts transitively by conjugation (this is your point 2 : $p$-Sylow are all conjugate to each other) we have by the first class formula :



$$frac{|G|}{n_3(G)}=|N_G(P_3)|text{ whence } |N_G(P_3)|=3$$



By definition $Hsubseteq N_G(H)$ so that $P_3subseteq N_G(P_3)$ since both are of cardinal $3$ they are equal.




So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)




We already saw that $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of normalizers of $3$-Sylows. Now we just saw that the normalizer of a $3$-Sylow is exactly the $3$-Sylow itself. Now I claim that if $S$ and $T$ are two different $3$-Sylows they cannot but intersect trivially. Indeed by Lagrange $Scap T$ has cardinal dividing $|S|=3$. So the cardinal is either $3$ or $1$, if $|Scap T|=3$ then $Scap Tsubseteq S$ and $|S|=3$ implies that $Scap T=S$ and then that $Ssubseteq T$ which implies (with the cardinal) that $S=T$ which is impossible. It follows that $|Scap T|=1$ i.e. $Scap T$ is trivial.



Since $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of $4$ different $3$-Sylows it is necessarily trivial.




Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).




Since $Ker(f)$ has been proven to be trivial it follows that $G$ is isomorphic to $f(G)$ which is a subgroup of $S_4$. Now you would like to identify the subgroup $f(G)$ you know that it contains $4$ $3$-Sylows. A $3$-Sylow is of order $3$, it contains two elements of order $3$ and one of order $1$. Since the intersection of two different $3$-Sylows is trivial and since you have $4$ $3$-Sylows you finally get in $f(G)$ exactly $8$ elements of order $3$ in $f(G)$. Since they are elements of order $3$ in $S_4$ they cannot but be $3$-cycles and since there are $8$ of them in $S_4$ they are all contained in $f(G)$. The fact that they generate $A_4$ is classical so that $A_4leq f(G)$ and by cardinality argument they are equal.



This part is too complicated, one way to define $A_n$ is to say that this is the unique subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$. Since $S_4$ is of order $24$ and $f(G)$ of order $12$ it follows that $f(G)$ is a subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$ and then $A_4=f(G)$ by unicity.




Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



I have a lot of difficulty understanding this proof we went over in class about classification of groups of order 12.



Let $G$ be a finite group of order $n=p^rm$ where $m nshortmid p$.




It seems that there is a mistake here one should read $p nshortmid m$ or $gcd(p,m)=1$.




Denote $Syl_p(G)$ as the set of all sylow p-subgroups, and $n_p(G)$ as the cardinality of $Syl_p(G)$.



(1) G has subgroups of order $p^r$. (How do we know this??)




A priori, it has no reason to be true but this is a theorem known as $textit{the first Sylow's theorem}$. It states that for any finite group $G$ and $p$ a prime number dividing $|G|$, if we write $|G|=p^rm$ with $p nshortmid m$ then $G$ admits a $p$-Sylow (which is defined as a subgroup of $G$ whose cardinal is $p^r$).




(2) We know all sylow p-groups are conjugate and their number $n_p(G) | m$, by the 2nd and 3rd Sylow Theorems.



(3) We have that $n_p(G) equiv 1(p). $



Then $n=12=2^2*3^1$ so $n_2(G)|3$ gives $n_2(G) in {1,3}$ and $n_3(G)|4$ so $n_3(G) in {1,4}$ since $2 notequiv 1(3)$.



Case 1: $n_3(G) = 4.$
Then the action of G by conjugation on $Syl_3(G)$ gives a homomorphism $f: G rightarrow S_{Syl_3(G)} simeq S_4$.
$Ker(f)$ consists of $g in G$ that normalizes all 3-Sylow subgroups. (Why?).




How is $f$ defined ? Since it is given by the conjugation action $f(g):=Smapsto gSg^{-1}$ so that if $f(g)$ is trivial (the indentity function here), it follows that $f(g)$ sends any $S$ to $S$ since $f(g)$ also sends any $S$ to $gSg^{-1}$ this boils down to for all $S$ we have $S=gSg^{-1}$.




Let $P_3$ be a 3-Sylow subgroup. Then the order of $P_3$ is 3. (I don't get that either)




This is the very definition of a $3$-Sylow in $G$ that gives you this since $|G|=12=4times 3$.




, and $[G:N_G(P_3)] = 4.$ Thus $P_3 subset N_G(P_3)$ gives $P_3 = N_G(P_3)$. (I'm lost here...)




Since $G$ acts transitively by conjugation (this is your point 2 : $p$-Sylow are all conjugate to each other) we have by the first class formula :



$$frac{|G|}{n_3(G)}=|N_G(P_3)|text{ whence } |N_G(P_3)|=3$$



By definition $Hsubseteq N_G(H)$ so that $P_3subseteq N_G(P_3)$ since both are of cardinal $3$ they are equal.




So $Ker(f) = cap Syl_3(G) = {e}$ (the intersection of the sylow 3-subgroups is trivial. (How did we arrive here...)




We already saw that $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of normalizers of $3$-Sylows. Now we just saw that the normalizer of a $3$-Sylow is exactly the $3$-Sylow itself. Now I claim that if $S$ and $T$ are two different $3$-Sylows they cannot but intersect trivially. Indeed by Lagrange $Scap T$ has cardinal dividing $|S|=3$. So the cardinal is either $3$ or $1$, if $|Scap T|=3$ then $Scap Tsubseteq S$ and $|S|=3$ implies that $Scap T=S$ and then that $Ssubseteq T$ which implies (with the cardinal) that $S=T$ which is impossible. It follows that $|Scap T|=1$ i.e. $Scap T$ is trivial.



Since $Ker(f)$ is the intersection of $4$ different $3$-Sylows it is necessarily trivial.




Thus we conclude that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_4$ of order 12.



To show $G$ is isomorphic to $A_4$, we have that $G$ has 8 elements of order 3: 4 3-sylow subgroups each has 3-1=2 elements of order 3. And $S_4$ has 8 3-cycles meaning f(G) contains all 3-cycles and hence the group they generate, which is $A_4$, so $A_4 subset f(G)$. But since $|A_4| = 12 = |f(G)$ then $f(G) = A_4$ and $G simeq A_4$.
(Not understanding the first half of the proof, I do not get this part either).




Since $Ker(f)$ has been proven to be trivial it follows that $G$ is isomorphic to $f(G)$ which is a subgroup of $S_4$. Now you would like to identify the subgroup $f(G)$ you know that it contains $4$ $3$-Sylows. A $3$-Sylow is of order $3$, it contains two elements of order $3$ and one of order $1$. Since the intersection of two different $3$-Sylows is trivial and since you have $4$ $3$-Sylows you finally get in $f(G)$ exactly $8$ elements of order $3$ in $f(G)$. Since they are elements of order $3$ in $S_4$ they cannot but be $3$-cycles and since there are $8$ of them in $S_4$ they are all contained in $f(G)$. The fact that they generate $A_4$ is classical so that $A_4leq f(G)$ and by cardinality argument they are equal.



This part is too complicated, one way to define $A_n$ is to say that this is the unique subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$. Since $S_4$ is of order $24$ and $f(G)$ of order $12$ it follows that $f(G)$ is a subgroup of index $2$ in $S_4$ and then $A_4=f(G)$ by unicity.




Case 2: $n_3(G) = 1.$ The scope of the question is too large, I will need to post separately to understand the second half, unless the organizational rules of math.stackexchange would require that I post here. In that case, I'll edit the question.



I basically cannot follow the proof because it seems to skip too many steps; it would be helpful if anyone could elaborate case 1 with more reasoning so that I can follow it. Any help would be appreciated; I've spent hours trying to look up and decipher the proof but without any success.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 27 '15 at 11:02









Clément GuérinClément Guérin

10k1836




10k1836












  • $begingroup$
    I think it'd be clearer if your input was in plain text and the original text highlighted.
    $endgroup$
    – lhf
    Nov 27 '15 at 11:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ClémentGuérin Thanks a lot for your help! I went through all of it, slowly and I understand it now. There is one last thought left: Since they are elements of order 3 in S4 they cannot but be 3-cycles. Is it true that 4-cycle can't be of order 3?
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Dec 1 '15 at 20:51










  • $begingroup$
    @user2193268, in general, in $S_n$ a $k$-cycle is of order $k$,it is a general property that directly comes from the definition of a $k$-cycle.
    $endgroup$
    – Clément Guérin
    Dec 2 '15 at 7:31


















  • $begingroup$
    I think it'd be clearer if your input was in plain text and the original text highlighted.
    $endgroup$
    – lhf
    Nov 27 '15 at 11:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ClémentGuérin Thanks a lot for your help! I went through all of it, slowly and I understand it now. There is one last thought left: Since they are elements of order 3 in S4 they cannot but be 3-cycles. Is it true that 4-cycle can't be of order 3?
    $endgroup$
    – user2193268
    Dec 1 '15 at 20:51










  • $begingroup$
    @user2193268, in general, in $S_n$ a $k$-cycle is of order $k$,it is a general property that directly comes from the definition of a $k$-cycle.
    $endgroup$
    – Clément Guérin
    Dec 2 '15 at 7:31
















$begingroup$
I think it'd be clearer if your input was in plain text and the original text highlighted.
$endgroup$
– lhf
Nov 27 '15 at 11:08




$begingroup$
I think it'd be clearer if your input was in plain text and the original text highlighted.
$endgroup$
– lhf
Nov 27 '15 at 11:08












$begingroup$
@ClémentGuérin Thanks a lot for your help! I went through all of it, slowly and I understand it now. There is one last thought left: Since they are elements of order 3 in S4 they cannot but be 3-cycles. Is it true that 4-cycle can't be of order 3?
$endgroup$
– user2193268
Dec 1 '15 at 20:51




$begingroup$
@ClémentGuérin Thanks a lot for your help! I went through all of it, slowly and I understand it now. There is one last thought left: Since they are elements of order 3 in S4 they cannot but be 3-cycles. Is it true that 4-cycle can't be of order 3?
$endgroup$
– user2193268
Dec 1 '15 at 20:51












$begingroup$
@user2193268, in general, in $S_n$ a $k$-cycle is of order $k$,it is a general property that directly comes from the definition of a $k$-cycle.
$endgroup$
– Clément Guérin
Dec 2 '15 at 7:31




$begingroup$
@user2193268, in general, in $S_n$ a $k$-cycle is of order $k$,it is a general property that directly comes from the definition of a $k$-cycle.
$endgroup$
– Clément Guérin
Dec 2 '15 at 7:31


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1546577%2fclassification-of-groups-of-order-12%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Nidaros erkebispedøme

Birsay

Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...