Nilpotent ring and Nilpotent groups.












4












$begingroup$



Let $R$ be a ring (associative and with unity) and $B$ be a subring with the property that $B^n = 0$ i.e.
$$ forall; x_1, x_2, dots, x_n in B: ; x_1 cdot x_2 cdots x_n = 0$$
My aim is to prove that the set $G = {1+x mid xin B}$ is a nilpotent group.




It is easy to see that $G$ is a group. For $n=3$, I found
$$[1+x,1+y]_G = 1+[x,y]_R,$$
where $$[1+x,1+y]_G = (1-x+x^2)(1-y+y^2)(1+x)(1+y)$$ is the group commutator
and $[x,y]_R = xy-yx$ is the ring commutator. And $G$ is a nilpotent group of degree no more than $3$.



But if $n=4$, I got
$$[1+x, 1+y]_G = 1 + x^2y+xy+xyx+y^2x-yx-yxy,$$ and I don't know what to do.






abstract-algebra group-theory ring-theory nilpotence nilpotent-groups







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    4












    $begingroup$



    Let $R$ be a ring (associative and with unity) and $B$ be a subring with the property that $B^n = 0$ i.e.
    $$ forall; x_1, x_2, dots, x_n in B: ; x_1 cdot x_2 cdots x_n = 0$$
    My aim is to prove that the set $G = {1+x mid xin B}$ is a nilpotent group.




    It is easy to see that $G$ is a group. For $n=3$, I found
    $$[1+x,1+y]_G = 1+[x,y]_R,$$
    where $$[1+x,1+y]_G = (1-x+x^2)(1-y+y^2)(1+x)(1+y)$$ is the group commutator
    and $[x,y]_R = xy-yx$ is the ring commutator. And $G$ is a nilpotent group of degree no more than $3$.



    But if $n=4$, I got
    $$[1+x, 1+y]_G = 1 + x^2y+xy+xyx+y^2x-yx-yxy,$$ and I don't know what to do.






    abstract-algebra group-theory ring-theory nilpotence nilpotent-groups







    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      4












      4








      4


      1



      $begingroup$



      Let $R$ be a ring (associative and with unity) and $B$ be a subring with the property that $B^n = 0$ i.e.
      $$ forall; x_1, x_2, dots, x_n in B: ; x_1 cdot x_2 cdots x_n = 0$$
      My aim is to prove that the set $G = {1+x mid xin B}$ is a nilpotent group.




      It is easy to see that $G$ is a group. For $n=3$, I found
      $$[1+x,1+y]_G = 1+[x,y]_R,$$
      where $$[1+x,1+y]_G = (1-x+x^2)(1-y+y^2)(1+x)(1+y)$$ is the group commutator
      and $[x,y]_R = xy-yx$ is the ring commutator. And $G$ is a nilpotent group of degree no more than $3$.



      But if $n=4$, I got
      $$[1+x, 1+y]_G = 1 + x^2y+xy+xyx+y^2x-yx-yxy,$$ and I don't know what to do.






      abstract-algebra group-theory ring-theory nilpotence nilpotent-groups







      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$





      Let $R$ be a ring (associative and with unity) and $B$ be a subring with the property that $B^n = 0$ i.e.
      $$ forall; x_1, x_2, dots, x_n in B: ; x_1 cdot x_2 cdots x_n = 0$$
      My aim is to prove that the set $G = {1+x mid xin B}$ is a nilpotent group.




      It is easy to see that $G$ is a group. For $n=3$, I found
      $$[1+x,1+y]_G = 1+[x,y]_R,$$
      where $$[1+x,1+y]_G = (1-x+x^2)(1-y+y^2)(1+x)(1+y)$$ is the group commutator
      and $[x,y]_R = xy-yx$ is the ring commutator. And $G$ is a nilpotent group of degree no more than $3$.



      But if $n=4$, I got
      $$[1+x, 1+y]_G = 1 + x^2y+xy+xyx+y^2x-yx-yxy,$$ and I don't know what to do.






      abstract-algebra group-theory ring-theory nilpotence nilpotent-groups




      abstract-algebra group-theory ring-theory nilpotence nilpotent-groups






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Feb 13 at 18:25









      Yanior Weg

      2,31911144




      2,31911144










      asked Dec 21 '18 at 16:06









      NoctusNoctus

      575




      575






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          First, note that since every element of $B$ is nilpotent, we have the following explicit formula for the inverse of $1-x$:
          $$(1-x)^{-1}=1+x+x^2+...+x^{n-1}$$



          So let's define our descending series of normal subgroups as:
          $$G_k=1+B_k$$ Where $B_k$ is the additive subgroup of $B$ generated by elements of the form $x_1 x_2 ...x_m$ for $x_iin B$, $mgeq k$.



          One may check that $G_k$ is a normal subgroup in $G$, and we have $G=G_1$ and $G_n=1$.



          So to show $G$ is nilpotent, it suffices to show that $[g,G_k]subset G_{k+1}$ for all $gin G$, where $[,]$ is the group commutator.



          Doing this in the case of the element of $G_k$ being $1-x_1 x_2 ....x_m$:



          $(1-y)(1-x_1 x_2 .... x_m)(1+y+y^2...+y^{n-1})(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-(1-y)x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})+y(x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          $alpha=-x_1 x_2 ..x_m(y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          $beta= y x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          =$(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m +alpha +beta)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          =$1-(x_1...x_m)^2+(alpha+beta)big((x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...(x_1...x_m)^{n-1}big)+(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m)(x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)+(alpha+beta)(1+x_1 ...x_m)$



          Which is in $G_{k+1}$, since all the terms after the $1$ in this expression are of length at least $m+1$.



          The general element case is the exact same, its just a bit more of a mess.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            You can simplify the argument by just showing $G_k/G_{k+1}$ is abelian. If $y, zin B_k$ then $$ (1+y)(1+z)=1 +y+z+yz $$ which is just $1+y+zpmod{G_{k+1}}$. This is the same as $(1+z)(1+y)$.
            $endgroup$
            – Hempelicious
            Dec 22 '18 at 17:20










          • $begingroup$
            @Hempelicious's computation (which, by the way, proves $left[G, G_kright] subseteq G_{k+1}$ as well, because we can set $y in B$ instead of $y in B_k$ and get the same final congruence) relies on the following lemma: Given any $k geq 0$ and any two elements $a, b in G$. If $a-b in B_{k+1}$, then $b^{-1}a in G_{k+1}$. (To prove this lemma, assume $a-b in B_{k+1}$. Then, $b^{-1}a - 1 = b^{-1}left(a-bright) in B_{k+1}$ as well, because $b^{-1} in G$ and $G B_{k+1} subseteq B_{k+1}$. In other words, $b^{-1}a in 1 + B_{k+1} = G_{k+1}$.)
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            Feb 9 at 23:11













          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%2f3048647%2fnilpotent-ring-and-nilpotent-groups%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












          $begingroup$

          First, note that since every element of $B$ is nilpotent, we have the following explicit formula for the inverse of $1-x$:
          $$(1-x)^{-1}=1+x+x^2+...+x^{n-1}$$



          So let's define our descending series of normal subgroups as:
          $$G_k=1+B_k$$ Where $B_k$ is the additive subgroup of $B$ generated by elements of the form $x_1 x_2 ...x_m$ for $x_iin B$, $mgeq k$.



          One may check that $G_k$ is a normal subgroup in $G$, and we have $G=G_1$ and $G_n=1$.



          So to show $G$ is nilpotent, it suffices to show that $[g,G_k]subset G_{k+1}$ for all $gin G$, where $[,]$ is the group commutator.



          Doing this in the case of the element of $G_k$ being $1-x_1 x_2 ....x_m$:



          $(1-y)(1-x_1 x_2 .... x_m)(1+y+y^2...+y^{n-1})(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-(1-y)x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})+y(x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          $alpha=-x_1 x_2 ..x_m(y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          $beta= y x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          =$(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m +alpha +beta)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          =$1-(x_1...x_m)^2+(alpha+beta)big((x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...(x_1...x_m)^{n-1}big)+(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m)(x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)+(alpha+beta)(1+x_1 ...x_m)$



          Which is in $G_{k+1}$, since all the terms after the $1$ in this expression are of length at least $m+1$.



          The general element case is the exact same, its just a bit more of a mess.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            You can simplify the argument by just showing $G_k/G_{k+1}$ is abelian. If $y, zin B_k$ then $$ (1+y)(1+z)=1 +y+z+yz $$ which is just $1+y+zpmod{G_{k+1}}$. This is the same as $(1+z)(1+y)$.
            $endgroup$
            – Hempelicious
            Dec 22 '18 at 17:20










          • $begingroup$
            @Hempelicious's computation (which, by the way, proves $left[G, G_kright] subseteq G_{k+1}$ as well, because we can set $y in B$ instead of $y in B_k$ and get the same final congruence) relies on the following lemma: Given any $k geq 0$ and any two elements $a, b in G$. If $a-b in B_{k+1}$, then $b^{-1}a in G_{k+1}$. (To prove this lemma, assume $a-b in B_{k+1}$. Then, $b^{-1}a - 1 = b^{-1}left(a-bright) in B_{k+1}$ as well, because $b^{-1} in G$ and $G B_{k+1} subseteq B_{k+1}$. In other words, $b^{-1}a in 1 + B_{k+1} = G_{k+1}$.)
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            Feb 9 at 23:11


















          2












          $begingroup$

          First, note that since every element of $B$ is nilpotent, we have the following explicit formula for the inverse of $1-x$:
          $$(1-x)^{-1}=1+x+x^2+...+x^{n-1}$$



          So let's define our descending series of normal subgroups as:
          $$G_k=1+B_k$$ Where $B_k$ is the additive subgroup of $B$ generated by elements of the form $x_1 x_2 ...x_m$ for $x_iin B$, $mgeq k$.



          One may check that $G_k$ is a normal subgroup in $G$, and we have $G=G_1$ and $G_n=1$.



          So to show $G$ is nilpotent, it suffices to show that $[g,G_k]subset G_{k+1}$ for all $gin G$, where $[,]$ is the group commutator.



          Doing this in the case of the element of $G_k$ being $1-x_1 x_2 ....x_m$:



          $(1-y)(1-x_1 x_2 .... x_m)(1+y+y^2...+y^{n-1})(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-(1-y)x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})+y(x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          $alpha=-x_1 x_2 ..x_m(y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          $beta= y x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          =$(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m +alpha +beta)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          =$1-(x_1...x_m)^2+(alpha+beta)big((x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...(x_1...x_m)^{n-1}big)+(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m)(x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)+(alpha+beta)(1+x_1 ...x_m)$



          Which is in $G_{k+1}$, since all the terms after the $1$ in this expression are of length at least $m+1$.



          The general element case is the exact same, its just a bit more of a mess.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            You can simplify the argument by just showing $G_k/G_{k+1}$ is abelian. If $y, zin B_k$ then $$ (1+y)(1+z)=1 +y+z+yz $$ which is just $1+y+zpmod{G_{k+1}}$. This is the same as $(1+z)(1+y)$.
            $endgroup$
            – Hempelicious
            Dec 22 '18 at 17:20










          • $begingroup$
            @Hempelicious's computation (which, by the way, proves $left[G, G_kright] subseteq G_{k+1}$ as well, because we can set $y in B$ instead of $y in B_k$ and get the same final congruence) relies on the following lemma: Given any $k geq 0$ and any two elements $a, b in G$. If $a-b in B_{k+1}$, then $b^{-1}a in G_{k+1}$. (To prove this lemma, assume $a-b in B_{k+1}$. Then, $b^{-1}a - 1 = b^{-1}left(a-bright) in B_{k+1}$ as well, because $b^{-1} in G$ and $G B_{k+1} subseteq B_{k+1}$. In other words, $b^{-1}a in 1 + B_{k+1} = G_{k+1}$.)
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            Feb 9 at 23:11
















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          First, note that since every element of $B$ is nilpotent, we have the following explicit formula for the inverse of $1-x$:
          $$(1-x)^{-1}=1+x+x^2+...+x^{n-1}$$



          So let's define our descending series of normal subgroups as:
          $$G_k=1+B_k$$ Where $B_k$ is the additive subgroup of $B$ generated by elements of the form $x_1 x_2 ...x_m$ for $x_iin B$, $mgeq k$.



          One may check that $G_k$ is a normal subgroup in $G$, and we have $G=G_1$ and $G_n=1$.



          So to show $G$ is nilpotent, it suffices to show that $[g,G_k]subset G_{k+1}$ for all $gin G$, where $[,]$ is the group commutator.



          Doing this in the case of the element of $G_k$ being $1-x_1 x_2 ....x_m$:



          $(1-y)(1-x_1 x_2 .... x_m)(1+y+y^2...+y^{n-1})(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-(1-y)x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})+y(x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          $alpha=-x_1 x_2 ..x_m(y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          $beta= y x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          =$(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m +alpha +beta)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          =$1-(x_1...x_m)^2+(alpha+beta)big((x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...(x_1...x_m)^{n-1}big)+(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m)(x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)+(alpha+beta)(1+x_1 ...x_m)$



          Which is in $G_{k+1}$, since all the terms after the $1$ in this expression are of length at least $m+1$.



          The general element case is the exact same, its just a bit more of a mess.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          First, note that since every element of $B$ is nilpotent, we have the following explicit formula for the inverse of $1-x$:
          $$(1-x)^{-1}=1+x+x^2+...+x^{n-1}$$



          So let's define our descending series of normal subgroups as:
          $$G_k=1+B_k$$ Where $B_k$ is the additive subgroup of $B$ generated by elements of the form $x_1 x_2 ...x_m$ for $x_iin B$, $mgeq k$.



          One may check that $G_k$ is a normal subgroup in $G$, and we have $G=G_1$ and $G_n=1$.



          So to show $G$ is nilpotent, it suffices to show that $[g,G_k]subset G_{k+1}$ for all $gin G$, where $[,]$ is the group commutator.



          Doing this in the case of the element of $G_k$ being $1-x_1 x_2 ....x_m$:



          $(1-y)(1-x_1 x_2 .... x_m)(1+y+y^2...+y^{n-1})(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-(1-y)x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$=



          $big(1-x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})+y(x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})big)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          $alpha=-x_1 x_2 ..x_m(y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          $beta= y x_1 x_2 ...x_m(1+y+y^2+...y^{n-1})$



          =$(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m +alpha +beta)(1+x_1 x_2 ..x_m + (x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)$



          =$1-(x_1...x_m)^2+(alpha+beta)big((x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...(x_1...x_m)^{n-1}big)+(1-x_1 x_2 ..x_m)(x_1 x_2...x_m)^2+...)+(alpha+beta)(1+x_1 ...x_m)$



          Which is in $G_{k+1}$, since all the terms after the $1$ in this expression are of length at least $m+1$.



          The general element case is the exact same, its just a bit more of a mess.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Feb 9 at 22:59









          darij grinberg

          11.1k33167




          11.1k33167










          answered Dec 22 '18 at 5:22









          user277182user277182

          456212




          456212












          • $begingroup$
            You can simplify the argument by just showing $G_k/G_{k+1}$ is abelian. If $y, zin B_k$ then $$ (1+y)(1+z)=1 +y+z+yz $$ which is just $1+y+zpmod{G_{k+1}}$. This is the same as $(1+z)(1+y)$.
            $endgroup$
            – Hempelicious
            Dec 22 '18 at 17:20










          • $begingroup$
            @Hempelicious's computation (which, by the way, proves $left[G, G_kright] subseteq G_{k+1}$ as well, because we can set $y in B$ instead of $y in B_k$ and get the same final congruence) relies on the following lemma: Given any $k geq 0$ and any two elements $a, b in G$. If $a-b in B_{k+1}$, then $b^{-1}a in G_{k+1}$. (To prove this lemma, assume $a-b in B_{k+1}$. Then, $b^{-1}a - 1 = b^{-1}left(a-bright) in B_{k+1}$ as well, because $b^{-1} in G$ and $G B_{k+1} subseteq B_{k+1}$. In other words, $b^{-1}a in 1 + B_{k+1} = G_{k+1}$.)
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            Feb 9 at 23:11




















          • $begingroup$
            You can simplify the argument by just showing $G_k/G_{k+1}$ is abelian. If $y, zin B_k$ then $$ (1+y)(1+z)=1 +y+z+yz $$ which is just $1+y+zpmod{G_{k+1}}$. This is the same as $(1+z)(1+y)$.
            $endgroup$
            – Hempelicious
            Dec 22 '18 at 17:20










          • $begingroup$
            @Hempelicious's computation (which, by the way, proves $left[G, G_kright] subseteq G_{k+1}$ as well, because we can set $y in B$ instead of $y in B_k$ and get the same final congruence) relies on the following lemma: Given any $k geq 0$ and any two elements $a, b in G$. If $a-b in B_{k+1}$, then $b^{-1}a in G_{k+1}$. (To prove this lemma, assume $a-b in B_{k+1}$. Then, $b^{-1}a - 1 = b^{-1}left(a-bright) in B_{k+1}$ as well, because $b^{-1} in G$ and $G B_{k+1} subseteq B_{k+1}$. In other words, $b^{-1}a in 1 + B_{k+1} = G_{k+1}$.)
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            Feb 9 at 23:11


















          $begingroup$
          You can simplify the argument by just showing $G_k/G_{k+1}$ is abelian. If $y, zin B_k$ then $$ (1+y)(1+z)=1 +y+z+yz $$ which is just $1+y+zpmod{G_{k+1}}$. This is the same as $(1+z)(1+y)$.
          $endgroup$
          – Hempelicious
          Dec 22 '18 at 17:20




          $begingroup$
          You can simplify the argument by just showing $G_k/G_{k+1}$ is abelian. If $y, zin B_k$ then $$ (1+y)(1+z)=1 +y+z+yz $$ which is just $1+y+zpmod{G_{k+1}}$. This is the same as $(1+z)(1+y)$.
          $endgroup$
          – Hempelicious
          Dec 22 '18 at 17:20












          $begingroup$
          @Hempelicious's computation (which, by the way, proves $left[G, G_kright] subseteq G_{k+1}$ as well, because we can set $y in B$ instead of $y in B_k$ and get the same final congruence) relies on the following lemma: Given any $k geq 0$ and any two elements $a, b in G$. If $a-b in B_{k+1}$, then $b^{-1}a in G_{k+1}$. (To prove this lemma, assume $a-b in B_{k+1}$. Then, $b^{-1}a - 1 = b^{-1}left(a-bright) in B_{k+1}$ as well, because $b^{-1} in G$ and $G B_{k+1} subseteq B_{k+1}$. In other words, $b^{-1}a in 1 + B_{k+1} = G_{k+1}$.)
          $endgroup$
          – darij grinberg
          Feb 9 at 23:11






          $begingroup$
          @Hempelicious's computation (which, by the way, proves $left[G, G_kright] subseteq G_{k+1}$ as well, because we can set $y in B$ instead of $y in B_k$ and get the same final congruence) relies on the following lemma: Given any $k geq 0$ and any two elements $a, b in G$. If $a-b in B_{k+1}$, then $b^{-1}a in G_{k+1}$. (To prove this lemma, assume $a-b in B_{k+1}$. Then, $b^{-1}a - 1 = b^{-1}left(a-bright) in B_{k+1}$ as well, because $b^{-1} in G$ and $G B_{k+1} subseteq B_{k+1}$. In other words, $b^{-1}a in 1 + B_{k+1} = G_{k+1}$.)
          $endgroup$
          – darij grinberg
          Feb 9 at 23:11




















          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%2f3048647%2fnilpotent-ring-and-nilpotent-groups%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

          Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

          Image
          0 0 $begingroup$ Need help with this problem. Suppose our lazy professor collects a quiz and a homework assignment from a class of n students one day, then distributes both the quizzes and the homework assignments back to the class in a random fashion for grading. Each student receives one quiz and one homework assignment to grade. (a) What is the probability that every student receives someone else's quiz to grade, and someone else's homework to grade? (b) What is the probability that no student receives both their own quiz and their own homework assignment to grade? In this case, some students may receive their own quiz, and others may receive their own homework assignment. (c) Compute the limiting probability as n approaches infinity in each case. ...
          Read more

          Aardman Animations

          Image
          Aardman Animations, Ltd. Aardman Animations Tipo privada Atividade Animação em stop-motion , Animação em CGI Fundação 1972 Fundador(es) Peter Lord David Sproxton Sede Bristol, Inglaterra  Reino Unido Proprietário(s) Dreamworks Pessoas-chave Peter Lord David Sproxton Nick Park Divisões Aardman Features Aardman Digital Aardman Commercials Aardman Broadcast Aardman International Aardman Rights Aardman Effects Aardman 3-D Systems Aardman Nathan Love AardBoiled Website oficial aardman.com ...
          Read more

          Are they similar matrix

          Image
          0 $begingroup$ Do $begin{bmatrix} 0&i&0\0&0&1\0&0&0 end{bmatrix} $ and $begin{bmatrix} 0&0&0\-i&0&0\0&1&0 end{bmatrix} $ are similar.Is this True/false Clearly both are nilpotent and one is conjucate transpose of other but how to know if they are similar.i'm stuck. Please help me linear-algebra vector-spaces eigenvalues-eigenvectors generalizedeigenvector share | cite | improve this question edited Dec 10 '18 at 6:38 Vasanth Kris asked Dec 10 '18 at 6:19 ...
          Read more