Applying Permutations to Group Theory

Applying Permutations to Group Theory
Page content

This article is a continuation of More on Groups: Morphisms, Normal Subgroups, etc… In this article we’re going to continue looking into groups and apply some of our results from studying permutations to our study of them. Both fields of study enforce each other.

But first, we’re going to continue our investigation of subgroups, morphisms and equivalence relations. We saw in More on Groups: Morphisms, Normal Subgroups, etc… that if ϕ is a homomorphism from a group A to a group B, then Ker(ϕ) is a normal subgroup of A. Now we’re going to show

Theorem (image is a subgroup)

Let ϕ be a homomorphism from group A into not necessarily all of group B. If we let

Im(ϕ):=Range(ϕ)={bB|aA and ϕ(a)=b}

Then Im(ϕ)B. That is, Im(ϕ) is a subgroup of B.

Proof

Using the subgroup test, suppose that x and yIm(ϕ), then we want to show that xy1 is also in Im(ϕ). By definition of Im(ϕ), there are two (not necessarily distinct) elements of A, a and b, say, such that ϕ(a)=x, and ϕ(b)=y. Now, since A is a group, ab1A, so then

ϕ(ab1)=ϕ(a)ϕ(b)1Im(ϕ)

That means that, by what we assumed a and b were, that xy1Im(ϕ).

QED

In the last entry, we proved that all kernels of homomorphisms were normal subgroups. Soon we’ll see that all normal subgroups are kernels for a homomorphism into another group. First we need to take a slight detour and discuss the notion of equivalence classes.

Definition (equivalence class)

Let be an equivalence relation on a set, S, let sS be an element of S. We define the equivalence class of s, often written as [s], to be the set of all elements, tS, such that st.

Definition (factor set)

Let S be a set and be an equivalence relation among pairs of elements of S. Then the set of equivalence classes of S form a set, sometimes written as S/. It is sometimes read “S mod ”, and is referred to as a factor set.

Factor sets are similar to factor groups, but don’t have the added structure that comes from having a binary operator. In order to make a factor group, you have to have a factor set and a binary operator that operates on pairs of equivalence classes, mapping them to a third equivalence class, which obeys the group axioms.

When the factor set can be turned into a factor group, it’s typically written as G/H:={[g]|gG}, where HG is a subgroup and [g]={gG|ggmodH}

Recall that

ggmodHgH=gH

However, for most subgroups, HG, this factor set cannot be made into a group. The reason is that a binary operator on the equivalence classes (which we’ll sometimes write as to avoid confusion with the binary operator in G) can’t be both well-defined and preserve some of the structure of G. What we want is for any two equivalence classes, [r], and [s], to have [r][s]=[rGs]. The good news is that sometimes this is possible. When H is a normal subgroup of G, then we can form a factor group, as we’ll show below.

Mini-Lemma (when aH = H)

aH=H if and only if aH.

Proof

Suppose aH=H, then aeaH=H, so aH. Now suppose that aH, then a=aeaH, so aHaH, and since cosets are either equal or disjoint (i.e. their intersection is empty), aH=H.

QED

Mini-Lemma (aN = Na)

Let NG, then for all gG, the cosets gN and Ng are the same. (This is an alternate way to define normal subgroup).

Proof

Let N be a normal subgroup of G and gG be an arbitrary element of G. Then g1Ng=N, which implies that if we apply g to the left of every element, the cosets will remain equal. That gives us Ng=gN.

QED

Theorem (mod normal subgroup is a group)

Let G be a group, and N be a normal subgroup. Let α(x):=[x] be a function which sends any xG to its equivalence class in G/N. Let [r][s]:=[rGs] be a binary operator on G/N.

  1. is well-defined. That is, for any two equivalence classes [r] and [s] in G/N, [r][s]=[rGs].
  2. G/N is a group with its binary operator.
  3. α is an epimorphism from G onto G/N, and Ker(α)=N.

Proof

Now we prove is well defined. The issue that we have to make sure we avoid is having the binary operator give different results for different choices of equivalence class representatives. What we mean is that if [s1] is an equivalence class and s2[s1], then [s1]=[s2]. We have to guarantee that if [r1]=[r2], that [r1][s1]=[r2][s2], whenever r1r2 and s1s2.

Let [r1]=[r2] and [s1]=[s2], we want to show that [r1][s1]=[r2][s2]. This will happen if and only if [r1Gs1]=[r2Gs2], which means that r1Gs1r2Gs2modN, and by definition that will happen if and only if (r1Gs1)N=(r2Gs2)N.

Since [r1][r2], we have r1r2modN, which means r1N=r2N, and likewise we also have s1N=s2N. We want to show that r1Gs1N=r2Gs2N. In the next calculation, we omit G, and instead just write r1s1, for example.

r1s1N=r1(s1N)=r1(s2N)

then by the mini lemma above, since N is a normal subgroup, we have

r1(s2N)=r1(Ns2)=(r1N)s2=(r2N)s2

Again, by the mini lemma we have, r2(Ns2)=r2s2N. Thus is well-defined, and we have proven claim 1 above.

By what we’ve just shown, for any gG, [g][g1]=[eG], so [g]1=[g1], so every equivalence class has an inverse equivalence class. We’ve also seen that for every two equivalence classes [r], and [s], [r][s]=[rGs], so G/N is closed under . The final step to proving that G/N is a group with binary operator is to show that this operator is associative, which is straight-forward.

Notice that for any three equivalence classes [r], [s], and [t], that

[r]([s][t])=[r][sGt]

and that is equal to

[rGsGGt]=[(rGs)Gt]

which from what we showed in the proof of claim 1 is equal to [rGs][t], which (again by what we showed from case 1) is equal to ([r][s])[t]. This finishes the proof of claim 2.

By the definition of α, it is a homomorphism. Let’s determine its kernel.

Suppose gG is such that α(g)=[e], that means that geN=N, so by the mini lemma above, gN. We also see that gN implies that gN=N, so α(g)=[g]=[e]. Therefore Ker(α)=N.

The only thing left to check is that it is onto G/N, which is easy. Let gN be a left coset of NG/N, then [g] is an equivalence class in the range of α. That finishes the proof of claim 3.

QED

We hope this isn’t getting too confusing. We’ve been sloppy about what exactly lives in G/N, and the proof of claim 3 in the above theorem laid that bare. At times it seems like G/N is a set of cosets of N, and at other times it seems like it’s a set of equivalence classes of elements of G. They’re really the same thing, though. We showed (in More on Groups: Morphisms, Normal Subgroups, etc…) that modH is an equivalence relation on the set of cosets of a subgroup of G. We defined two elements to be in the same equivalence class if they belong to the same coset.

Now we start to think about how a group can act on a set.

Definition (group actions)

Let X be a set, SX be the group of all permutations of X, and GSX, then gG is said to act on X, and G is said to be a group of actions on X.

In fact, since G itself is a set with a binary operation, G can even act on itself. What’s more, every group acts on itself.

Theorem (originally due to Cayley)

Let G be a group, then there is an isomorphism ϕ:GHSG, from G into a subgroup of SG, the group of all permutations of the elements of G.

This means that any group can be thought of as a subgroup of a group of permutations.

Proof

Let G be a group, but for this proof, let’s refer to the set of all of the elements of G as Y. That is, Y={g|gG}. Then a permutation of G is a permutation of Y, and belongs to SY, by definition. Define β:GSY such that β(g):=πgSY, where πg(y)=gGy, for any yY. Remember, yY means that y is an element of G, so gGy is defined.

First we have to show that

β(g1Gg2)(y)=β(g1)SYβ(g2)(y)=πg1πg2(y)=πg1(πg2(y))

for all yY. This follows from the fact that

β(g1Gg1)(y)=πg1Gg2(y)=(g1Gg2)Gy

and

πg1(πg2(y))=g1G(g2Gy)

By associativity, the two must be equal.

Finally, we have to show that for any gG, β(g)SY, i.e. that πg is actually a permutation of Y. To do that we must show that πg:Y1-1, ontoY.

Let’s first show that πg(y) is 1-1. Suppose πg(y1)=πg(y2), then gGy1=gGy2. We’ve already shown that we can apply cancellation in G, so y1=y2, and π is 1-1.

Now we show that πg is onto. Let y be any element in Y, and thus an element of G. Consider that

πg(g1Gy)=gG(g1Gy)=y

so yRange(πg), thus πg is onto. It is therefore a permutation, and our proof is finished.

QED

In the earlier entry (More Math of Permutations), we showed that for any permutation of a finite set, there is a function

Sign(π)=±1

and that

Sign(π1π2)=Sign(π1)Sign(π2)

We now know that Sign:SX{1,1} is a homomorphism from the set of all permutations of a finite set X into the set {1,1}. What’s more, with the above Theorem of Cayley, there’s also such a homomorphism from each finite group into the set of {1,1}. This can be very useful. As an example we can now prove a couple of lemmas:

Lemma (either all even or half even)

Let G be a finite group. Then if there exists gG, such that Sign(g)=1, there exists NG, such that (G:N)=2. Otherwise for every gG, Sign(g)=1.

Proof

Suppose there is a gG, such that Sign(g)=1, then let N:={hG|Sign(h)=1}. Notice that if n1 and n2N, that

Sign(n1n21)=Sign(n1)Sign(n2)1=111=1

so n1n21N, and thus N is a subgroup of G. It is a normal subgroup, because for any gG, and nN,

Sign(g1ng)=Sign(g1)Sign(n)Sign(g)

and that is equal to

Sign(g)1Sign(g)1=1

and so is in N. Therefore g1Ng=N, so N is normal.

Now we show that (G:N)=2. Notice that for any nN, gnN, and likewise, for any hN, ghN. We previously showed that πg(x)=gx is 1-1, so |N||GN||N|, therefore |N|=12|G|, and thus (G:N)=2.

QED

Lemma ( 2*odd has a normal subgroup of order odd)

Let G be a group of order 2(2k+1), then G has a subgroup N of order 2(2k+1), which is normal in G.

We’re going to prove this in the next entry. It takes a bit more work than the above lemma.