Sylow's First Theorem acting on Abelian Group











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












Background



In the book of Judson's book on abstract algebra, Sylow's First Theorem is proved by first invoking the class equation and then considering the case where $p$ can/cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ ($C_G(g)$ is the centraliser subgroup $g$ in $G$). But it is not clear what happens if $p$ cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ when $C_G(g)$ is the whole group.



The proof in Judson's book



Question



If $G$ is an abelian group, and thus $C_G(g)$ is the whole group for all $g$ in $G$, the induction hypothesis can no longer require that $C_G(g)$ has a group of order $p^r$ since the order of the subgroup is the same as the group itself, then how can Sylow's First Theorem be proved? I understand that Cauchy theorem for abelian groups will say $G$ has a subgroup of order $p$, but then $G$ is now divisible by $p^r$, which is not necessarily a prime number, how should I prove that it also has a subgroup of order $p^r$ (although it definitely has a subgroup of order $p$ by Cauchy)?










share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    0
    down vote

    favorite












    Background



    In the book of Judson's book on abstract algebra, Sylow's First Theorem is proved by first invoking the class equation and then considering the case where $p$ can/cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ ($C_G(g)$ is the centraliser subgroup $g$ in $G$). But it is not clear what happens if $p$ cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ when $C_G(g)$ is the whole group.



    The proof in Judson's book



    Question



    If $G$ is an abelian group, and thus $C_G(g)$ is the whole group for all $g$ in $G$, the induction hypothesis can no longer require that $C_G(g)$ has a group of order $p^r$ since the order of the subgroup is the same as the group itself, then how can Sylow's First Theorem be proved? I understand that Cauchy theorem for abelian groups will say $G$ has a subgroup of order $p$, but then $G$ is now divisible by $p^r$, which is not necessarily a prime number, how should I prove that it also has a subgroup of order $p^r$ (although it definitely has a subgroup of order $p$ by Cauchy)?










    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite











      Background



      In the book of Judson's book on abstract algebra, Sylow's First Theorem is proved by first invoking the class equation and then considering the case where $p$ can/cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ ($C_G(g)$ is the centraliser subgroup $g$ in $G$). But it is not clear what happens if $p$ cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ when $C_G(g)$ is the whole group.



      The proof in Judson's book



      Question



      If $G$ is an abelian group, and thus $C_G(g)$ is the whole group for all $g$ in $G$, the induction hypothesis can no longer require that $C_G(g)$ has a group of order $p^r$ since the order of the subgroup is the same as the group itself, then how can Sylow's First Theorem be proved? I understand that Cauchy theorem for abelian groups will say $G$ has a subgroup of order $p$, but then $G$ is now divisible by $p^r$, which is not necessarily a prime number, how should I prove that it also has a subgroup of order $p^r$ (although it definitely has a subgroup of order $p$ by Cauchy)?










      share|cite|improve this question













      Background



      In the book of Judson's book on abstract algebra, Sylow's First Theorem is proved by first invoking the class equation and then considering the case where $p$ can/cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ ($C_G(g)$ is the centraliser subgroup $g$ in $G$). But it is not clear what happens if $p$ cannot divide $[G:C_G(g)]$ when $C_G(g)$ is the whole group.



      The proof in Judson's book



      Question



      If $G$ is an abelian group, and thus $C_G(g)$ is the whole group for all $g$ in $G$, the induction hypothesis can no longer require that $C_G(g)$ has a group of order $p^r$ since the order of the subgroup is the same as the group itself, then how can Sylow's First Theorem be proved? I understand that Cauchy theorem for abelian groups will say $G$ has a subgroup of order $p$, but then $G$ is now divisible by $p^r$, which is not necessarily a prime number, how should I prove that it also has a subgroup of order $p^r$ (although it definitely has a subgroup of order $p$ by Cauchy)?







      group-theory finite-groups abelian-groups sylow-theory






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 17 at 8:56









      hephaes

      1527




      1527






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          The question is now resolved. It turns out that when $G$ is abelian, $G$ = $Z(G)$, and hence $|Z(G)|$ is now divisible by $p$, and the second part of Judson's proof will take care of this case.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















            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',
            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%2f3002116%2fsylows-first-theorem-acting-on-abelian-group%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








            up vote
            0
            down vote













            The question is now resolved. It turns out that when $G$ is abelian, $G$ = $Z(G)$, and hence $|Z(G)|$ is now divisible by $p$, and the second part of Judson's proof will take care of this case.






            share|cite|improve this answer

























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              The question is now resolved. It turns out that when $G$ is abelian, $G$ = $Z(G)$, and hence $|Z(G)|$ is now divisible by $p$, and the second part of Judson's proof will take care of this case.






              share|cite|improve this answer























                up vote
                0
                down vote










                up vote
                0
                down vote









                The question is now resolved. It turns out that when $G$ is abelian, $G$ = $Z(G)$, and hence $|Z(G)|$ is now divisible by $p$, and the second part of Judson's proof will take care of this case.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                The question is now resolved. It turns out that when $G$ is abelian, $G$ = $Z(G)$, and hence $|Z(G)|$ is now divisible by $p$, and the second part of Judson's proof will take care of this case.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 17 at 9:03









                hephaes

                1527




                1527






























                    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.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • 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.


                    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%2f3002116%2fsylows-first-theorem-acting-on-abelian-group%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

                    Aardman Animations

                    Are they similar matrix

                    “minimization” problem in Euclidean space related to orthonormal basis