Skip to content

Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups: The Condition for Multiplying Cosets

Prerequisite:Subgroups and Cosets: Why Lagrange's Theorem Produces Divisibility

Raw
  • If we try to equip the set G/HG/H of left cosets of a subgroup H≤GH \le G with the law “multiply the representatives”, the answer may change when the representatives are changed. The pair G=S3G = S_3, H={e,(1 2)}H = \{e, (1\,2)\} is an actual example.
  • A necessary and sufficient condition for this law to be defined is that gH=HggH = Hg for every g∈Gg \in G, that is, that HH be a normal subgroup (Theorem 3.2). Normality is not some odd requirement that left and right cosets coincide; it is a restatement of the very wish to divide.
  • For a normal subgroup NN, the set G/NG/N becomes a group (the quotient group), and π:G→G/N, g↦gN\pi : G \to G/N,\ g \mapsto gN is a surjective homomorphism with kernel NN. Conversely the kernel of a homomorphism is always a normal subgroup, so “normal subgroup” and “kernel of a homomorphism” are two faces of one concept.
  • The subgroups of Z\mathbb{Z} are exactly the nZn\mathbb{Z}, and the quotient group Z/nZ\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z} is cyclic of order nn. The order of aˉ\bar{a} is n/gcd⁡(a,n)n/\gcd(a,n), and aˉ\bar{a} is a generator precisely when gcd⁡(a,n)=1\gcd(a,n) = 1.
  • Passing to a quotient is an operation that discards information. The group G/NG/N need not be a subgroup of GG, and all distinctions inside NN are forgotten completely.

1. Motivation: giving the set of cosets a law of composition

Section titled “1. Motivation: giving the set of cosets a law of composition”

The hands of a clock come full circle at 12. Five hours after 9 o’clock is not 14 o’clock but 2 o’clock. What we are doing here is identifying integers under the relation “same remainder upon division by 12” and then adding in the identified world. That this computation is consistent is something we normally never question. Pause for a moment, however, and it is far from obvious. Behind it lies the fact that we may replace 99 by 2121 and 55 by 1717 without changing the answer, that is,

9+5=14≡2,21+17=38≡2(mod12)9 + 5 = 14 \equiv 2, \qquad 21 + 17 = 38 \equiv 2 \pmod{12}

so that the answer is determined independently of the choice of representatives. Only because of this does clock arithmetic mean anything. Gauss opened his Disquisitiones Arithmeticae (1801) by introducing the congruence symbol a≡b(modm)a \equiv b \pmod{m} and setting out that congruences may be “computed with directly” as far as addition, subtraction and multiplication are concerned. This is the starting point of the idea of a quotient in modern algebra.

Group theory treats this situation in far greater generality. Given a group GG and a subgroup HH, we saw in Subgroups and cosets (Lagrange’s theorem) that GG is partitioned into the left cosets aHaH (Lemma 5.2[Subgroups and Cosets]). We write G/HG/H for the set of all cosets. This is the situation corresponding to Z\mathbb{Z} and 12Z12\mathbb{Z} in the case of the integers. It is then tempting to ask the naive question:

Can G/HG/H be given a law of composition by multiplying representatives? That is, may we set (aH)⋅(bH):=(ab)H(aH) \cdot (bH) := (ab)H?

If this were possible, G/HG/H would itself be a group, and we would obtain a new group that views GG “coarsely, up to HH”. The basic strategy of group theory — break a large group into smaller ones and study those — begins here.

The definition, however, fails in general. It can happen that aH=a′HaH = a'H and bH=b′HbH = b'H while (ab)H≠(a′b′)H(ab)H \ne (a'b')H (Example 3.1). Isolating the condition under which it does not fail yields exactly the notion that Galois was the first to single out (as a subgroup whose left and right coset decompositions agree), that later came to be called an “invariant subgroup”, and that we call today a normal subgroup. The aim of this article is to derive that condition, to construct the quotient group, and to verify the most basic example Z/nZ\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z} down to the last detail.

The idea of dividing by an equivalence relation to build a new object is of course not confined to group theory. The general theory at the level of sets is collected in Relations and equivalence relations: what does “the same” mean?. It clarifies matters to read this article as asking: when does a law of composition descend to the quotient?

2. Preliminaries: cosets and homomorphisms

Section titled “2. Preliminaries: cosets and homomorphisms”

Let us fix notation. Throughout, GG is a group with identity element ee, and H≤GH \le G means that HH is a subgroup of GG.

Definition 2.1(Left coset, right coset, index)

For H≤GH \le G and a∈Ga \in G, the sets

aH:={ah:h∈H},Ha:={ha:h∈H}aH := \{ah : h \in H\}, \qquad Ha := \{ha : h \in H\}

are called respectively the left coset and the right coset of HH containing aa. The set of all left cosets is written G/HG/H, the set of all right cosets H\GH \backslash G. The number of elements of G/HG/H (a cardinal, not necessarily finite) is called the index of HH in GG and is written [G:H][G : H].

We collect the basic properties of left cosets, since we shall use them repeatedly. The proof merely reconfirms the content of the previous chapter, but everything that follows rests on this proposition, so we write it out in full.

Proposition 2.2(Basic properties of left cosets)

Let H≤GH \le G and a,b∈Ga, b \in G.

  1. h∈Hh \in H if and only if hH=HhH = H.
  2. aH=bHaH = bH if and only if a−1b∈Ha^{-1}b \in H.
  3. If aH∩bH≠∅aH \cap bH \ne \varnothing then aH=bHaH = bH. In particular the left cosets form a partition of GG.
  4. The map H→aH, h↦ahH \to aH,\ h \mapsto ah is a bijection. In particular ∣aH∣=∣H∣|aH| = |H|.
Proof(Proposition 2.2)

(1) Suppose hH=HhH = H. Since HH contains the identity ee, we get h=he∈hH=Hh = he \in hH = H, so h∈Hh \in H. Conversely let h∈Hh \in H. As HH is closed under products, hH⊆HhH \subseteq H. For the reverse inclusion take x∈Hx \in H. Since HH is closed under inverses we have h−1∈Hh^{-1} \in H, hence h−1x∈Hh^{-1}x \in H, and x=h(h−1x)∈hHx = h(h^{-1}x) \in hH. Thus H⊆hHH \subseteq hH, and hH=HhH = H follows.

(2) Suppose aH=bHaH = bH. Then b=be∈bH=aHb = be \in bH = aH, so there is h∈Hh \in H with b=ahb = ah. Multiplying on the left by a−1a^{-1} gives a−1b=h∈Ha^{-1}b = h \in H. Conversely suppose a−1b=h∈Ha^{-1}b = h \in H. Then b=ahb = ah and

bH=(ah)H=a(hH)=aHbH = (ah)H = a(hH) = aH

where the second equality is associativity of the product and the third uses (1).

(3) Take x∈aH∩bHx \in aH \cap bH, so that x=ah1=bh2x = ah_1 = bh_2 for some h1,h2∈Hh_1, h_2 \in H. Then a−1b=h1h2−1∈Ha^{-1}b = h_1h_2^{-1} \in H (using that HH is a subgroup), so aH=bHaH = bH by (2). Moreover e∈He \in H gives a=ae∈aHa = ae \in aH, so every element lies in at least one left coset. Hence the left cosets partition GG into pairwise disjoint subsets.

(4) Surjectivity is the definition of aHaH. Injectivity follows because ah=ah′ah = ah' gives h=h′h = h' after multiplying on the left by a−1a^{-1} (cancellation in a group).

Remark 2.3

Parts (2) and (3) of Proposition 2.2 say that the binary relation on GG defined by a∼b  ⟺  defa−1b∈Ha \sim b \overset{\text{def}}{\iff} a^{-1}b \in H is an equivalence relation(Definition 3.1)[関係と同値関係] whose equivalence classes are exactly the left cosets. For Z\mathbb{Z} with H=nZH = n\mathbb{Z}, the relation a∼ba \sim b reads b−a∈nZb - a \in n\mathbb{Z}, that is, a≡b(modn)a \equiv b \pmod{n}. Congruences are a special case of left cosets.

Discussing quotient groups requires the language of homomorphisms, so we set it up here. The subject is treated properly in the next chapter, The isomorphism theorems for groups.

Definition 2.4(Homomorphism and kernel)

Let G,G′G, G' be groups and let e′e' denote the identity of G′G'. A map f:G→G′f : G \to G' satisfying

f(xy)=f(x)f(y)(∀x,y∈G)f(xy) = f(x)f(y) \qquad (\forall x, y \in G)

is called a group homomorphism. In that case

ker⁡f:={x∈G:f(x)=e′},im⁡f:=f(G)\ker f := \{x \in G : f(x) = e'\}, \qquad \operatorname{im} f := f(G)

are called respectively the kernel and the image of ff. A bijective homomorphism is an isomorphism, and we write G≅G′G \cong G'.

Remark 2.5

A homomorphism ff preserves the identity and inverses. Indeed, from f(e)=f(ee)=f(e)f(e)f(e) = f(ee) = f(e)f(e) we obtain e′=f(e)e' = f(e) upon multiplying both sides by f(e)−1f(e)^{-1}. Furthermore e′=f(e)=f(xx−1)=f(x)f(x−1)e' = f(e) = f(xx^{-1}) = f(x)f(x^{-1}) gives f(x−1)=f(x)−1f(x^{-1}) = f(x)^{-1}. Also ker⁡f\ker f is a subgroup of GG: from f(e)=e′f(e) = e' we get e∈ker⁡fe \in \ker f; if x,y∈ker⁡fx, y \in \ker f then f(xy)=e′e′=e′f(xy) = e'e' = e'; and if x∈ker⁡fx \in \ker f then f(x−1)=f(x)−1=(e′)−1=e′f(x^{-1}) = f(x)^{-1} = (e')^{-1} = e'.

3. When is the product of representatives defined?

Section titled “3. When is the product of representatives defined?”

Now to the heart of the matter. Given H≤GH \le G, we wish to put a law of composition on G/HG/H. The rule we want to lay down is

(aH)⋅(bH):=(ab)H(aH) \cdot (bH) := (ab)H

The left-hand side takes two sets as input, while the right-hand side produces its answer by way of the representatives aa and bb. For a fixed set aHaH there are ∣H∣|H| possible choices of representative aa, so unless we check that the answer does not depend on that choice, the formula defines no map at all. Let us first write down precisely what must be checked.

(W)aH=a′H and bH=b′H ⟹ (ab)H=(a′b′)H(∀a,a′,b,b′∈G)\text{(W)} \qquad aH = a'H \ \text{and}\ bH = b'H \ \Longrightarrow\ (ab)H = (a'b')H \qquad (\forall a, a', b, b' \in G)

When condition (W) holds, the rule above defines a map G/H×G/H→G/HG/H \times G/H \to G/H, and we say that the operation is well defined. As the next example shows, (W) does not hold unconditionally.

Example 3.1(Failure of the product of representatives in the symmetric group on three letters)

Let G=S3G = S_3 (all permutations of {1,2,3}\{1,2,3\}), with product the composition of maps, (στ)(x)=σ(τ(x))(\sigma\tau)(x) = \sigma(\tau(x)). Take the subgroup

H={e, (1 2)}H = \{e,\ (1\,2)\}

so that ∣H∣=2|H| = 2 and [S3:H]=3[S_3 : H] = 3.

First we compute the left cosets. For (1 3)(1 2)(1\,3)(1\,2) we have 1↦2↦21 \mapsto 2 \mapsto 2, 2↦1↦32 \mapsto 1 \mapsto 3, 3↦3↦13 \mapsto 3 \mapsto 1, giving (1 2 3)(1\,2\,3). Likewise (2 3)(1 2)(2\,3)(1\,2) sends 1↦2↦31 \mapsto 2 \mapsto 3, 2↦1↦12 \mapsto 1 \mapsto 1, 3↦3↦23 \mapsto 3 \mapsto 2, giving (1 3 2)(1\,3\,2). Hence

eH={e,(1 2)},(1 3)H={(1 3),(1 2 3)},(2 3)H={(2 3),(1 3 2)}.eH = \{e, (1\,2)\},\qquad (1\,3)H = \{(1\,3), (1\,2\,3)\},\qquad (2\,3)H = \{(2\,3), (1\,3\,2)\}.

On the other hand (1 2)(1 3)(1\,2)(1\,3) sends 1↦3↦31 \mapsto 3 \mapsto 3, 2↦2↦12 \mapsto 2 \mapsto 1, 3↦1↦23 \mapsto 1 \mapsto 2, giving (1 3 2)(1\,3\,2), so

H(1 3)={(1 3),(1 3 2)}≠(1 3)HH(1\,3) = \{(1\,3), (1\,3\,2)\} \ne (1\,3)H

and the left and right cosets do not agree.

Now we test (W). Since (1 3)H=(1 2 3)H(1\,3)H = (1\,2\,3)H, the elements a=b=(1 3)a = b = (1\,3) and a′=b′=(1 2 3)a' = b' = (1\,2\,3) are representatives of the same coset. Yet

ab=(1 3)(1 3)=e ⟹ (ab)H=H,ab = (1\,3)(1\,3) = e \ \Longrightarrow\ (ab)H = H,a′b′=(1 2 3)(1 2 3)=(1 3 2) ⟹ (a′b′)H=(2 3)Ha'b' = (1\,2\,3)(1\,2\,3) = (1\,3\,2) \ \Longrightarrow\ (a'b')H = (2\,3)H

(here (1 2 3)(1 2 3)(1\,2\,3)(1\,2\,3) sends 1↦2↦31 \mapsto 2 \mapsto 3, 2↦3↦12 \mapsto 3 \mapsto 1, 3↦1↦23 \mapsto 1 \mapsto 2, that is, it equals (1 3 2)(1\,3\,2)), and H≠(2 3)HH \ne (2\,3)H. Merely changing the representatives changed the resulting coset. For this HH there is no way to put a law of composition on G/HG/H by multiplying representatives.

Looking at the reason for the failure, one sees that the discrepancy between left and right cosets is what matters. Indeed, the following theorem holds. It is the most important statement in this article.

Theorem 3.2(Necessary and sufficient condition for the product of cosets to be defined)

Let GG be a group and H≤GH \le G. The following four conditions are equivalent.

  1. Condition (W) holds; that is, the operation (aH)(bH):=(ab)H(aH)(bH) := (ab)H on G/HG/H is well defined.
  2. aHa−1⊆HaHa^{-1} \subseteq H for every a∈Ga \in G, where aHa−1:={aha−1:h∈H}aHa^{-1} := \{aha^{-1} : h \in H\}.
  3. aHa−1=HaHa^{-1} = H for every a∈Ga \in G.
  4. aH=HaaH = Ha for every a∈Ga \in G.
Proof(Theorem 3.2)

We prove (1)⇒(2)⇒(3)⇒(4)⇒(1)(1) \Rightarrow (2) \Rightarrow (3) \Rightarrow (4) \Rightarrow (1) in that order.

(1) ⇒\Rightarrow (2). Take arbitrary a∈Ga \in G and h∈Hh \in H. Since h∈Hh \in H, part (1) of Proposition 2.2 gives hH=H=eHhH = H = eH. Also a−1H=a−1Ha^{-1}H = a^{-1}H holds trivially. Applying (W) with representatives hh and ee in the first slot and a−1a^{-1} and a−1a^{-1} in the second, we obtain

(ha−1)H=(ea−1)H=a−1H(h a^{-1})H = (e a^{-1})H = a^{-1}H

By part (2) of Proposition 2.2, this is equivalent to (ha−1)−1⋅a−1∈H(ha^{-1})^{-1} \cdot a^{-1} \in H, that is, to

ah−1a−1∈Ha h^{-1} a^{-1} \in H

As hh ranges over all of HH and h↦h−1h \mapsto h^{-1} is a bijection of HH onto itself, h−1h^{-1} also ranges over all of HH. Hence aha−1∈Haha^{-1} \in H for every h∈Hh \in H, that is, aHa−1⊆HaHa^{-1} \subseteq H.

(2) ⇒\Rightarrow (3). Applying (2) to aa gives aHa−1⊆HaHa^{-1} \subseteq H. Next, applying (2) to a−1a^{-1} gives a−1Ha⊆Ha^{-1}Ha \subseteq H. Conjugating both sides by aa on the left and a−1a^{-1} on the right yields

H=a(a−1Ha)a−1⊆aHa−1H = a(a^{-1}Ha)a^{-1} \subseteq aHa^{-1}

(we used that X⊆YX \subseteq Y implies aXa−1⊆aYa−1aXa^{-1} \subseteq aYa^{-1}). Combining the two inclusions gives aHa−1=HaHa^{-1} = H. Note that the universally quantified hypothesis — that (2) holds for every element — is what does the essential work here.

(3) ⇒\Rightarrow (4). Multiplying both sides of aHa−1=HaHa^{-1} = H on the right by aa gives aH=HaaH = Ha. Since this is an equality of sets, let us be more careful: if x∈aHx \in aH then x=ahx = ah and x=(aha−1)a∈Hax = (aha^{-1})a \in Ha; conversely if x∈Hax \in Ha then x=hax = ha, and applying (3) to a−1a^{-1} gives a−1ha∈Ha^{-1}ha \in H, so x=a(a−1ha)∈aHx = a(a^{-1}ha) \in aH.

(4) ⇒\Rightarrow (1). Suppose aH=a′HaH = a'H and bH=b′HbH = b'H. By part (2) of Proposition 2.2 we may write a′=ah1a' = ah_1 and b′=bh2b' = bh_2 with h1,h2∈Hh_1, h_2 \in H. Then

a′b′=ah1bh2.a'b' = a h_1 b h_2 .

Now h1b∈Hbh_1 b \in Hb, and applying hypothesis (4) to bb gives Hb=bHHb = bH, so there is h3∈Hh_3 \in H with h1b=bh3h_1 b = b h_3. Therefore

a′b′=a(bh3)h2=(ab)(h3h2)∈(ab)Ha'b' = a (b h_3) h_2 = (ab)(h_3h_2) \in (ab)H

(here h3h2∈Hh_3h_2 \in H because HH is closed under products). On the other hand a′b′∈(a′b′)Ha'b' \in (a'b')H, so (ab)H∩(a′b′)H≠∅(ab)H \cap (a'b')H \ne \varnothing, and part (3) of Proposition 2.2 gives (ab)H=(a′b′)H(ab)H = (a'b')H.

Equivalence of the four conditions on normality (proved in the direction of the arrows)

The value of this theorem lies in the fact that condition (2) is easy to check. Condition (1) is a universal statement about four elements, whereas (2) is nothing more than an inclusion between two subsets, expressing that conjugation does not carry elements of HH out of HH. From now on we shall verify normality mainly in the form (2).

Definition 4.1(Normal subgroup)

A subgroup NN of a group GG satisfying

gNg−1=NgNg^{-1} = N

for every g∈Gg \in G is called a normal subgroup of GG, written N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G. By Theorem 3.2, this is equivalent both to ”gNg−1⊆NgNg^{-1} \subseteq N for every g∈Gg \in G” and to ”gN=NggN = Ng for every g∈Gg \in G”.

The element gxg−1g x g^{-1} is called the conjugate of xx by gg. Setting φg(x):=gxg−1\varphi_g(x) := gxg^{-1}, we have φg(xy)=gxyg−1=(gxg−1)(gyg−1)=φg(x)φg(y)\varphi_g(xy) = gxyg^{-1} = (gxg^{-1})(gyg^{-1}) = \varphi_g(x)\varphi_g(y), so φg\varphi_g is a homomorphism, and since φg−1\varphi_{g^{-1}} is its inverse it is an isomorphism of GG onto itself (an inner automorphism). A normal subgroup is therefore a subgroup fixed by every inner automorphism. This is the view behind the older name “invariant subgroup”. Think of conjugation as changing the coordinates from which one looks: in SnS_n it amounts to relabelling the letters, in GLn\mathrm{GL}_n to changing the basis. Normal subgroups are those unaffected by such relabelling — subgroups intrinsic to the group.

Proposition 4.2(Tests for normality)

Let GG be a group.

  1. If GG is abelian, then every subgroup of GG is normal.
  2. If H≤GH \le G satisfies [G:H]=2[G : H] = 2, then H⊴GH \trianglelefteq G.
  3. The centre Z(G):={z∈G:zx=xz (∀x∈G)}Z(G) := \{z \in G : zx = xz \ (\forall x \in G)\} of GG is a normal subgroup of GG.
  4. If f:G→G′f : G \to G' is a group homomorphism, then ker⁡f⊴G\ker f \trianglelefteq G.
  5. If {Nλ}λ∈Λ\{N_\lambda\}_{\lambda \in \Lambda} is a family of normal subgroups of GG (with Λ≠∅\Lambda \ne \varnothing), then ⋂λ∈ΛNλ⊴G\bigcap_{\lambda \in \Lambda} N_\lambda \trianglelefteq G.
Proof(Proposition 4.2)

(1) Let H≤GH \le G, g∈Gg \in G and h∈Hh \in H. Since GG is abelian, ghg−1=hgg−1=h∈Hghg^{-1} = hgg^{-1} = h \in H. Hence gHg−1⊆HgHg^{-1} \subseteq H for every gg, and part (2) of Theorem 3.2 gives H⊴GH \trianglelefteq G.

(2) Take g∈Gg \in G. If g∈Hg \in H, then part (1) of Proposition 2.2 gives gH=HgH = H, and the same argument for right cosets gives Hg=HHg = H, so gH=HggH = Hg. Now suppose g∉Hg \notin H. The left cosets partition GG (part (3) of Proposition 2.2) and there are [G:H]=2[G:H] = 2 of them. One of them is H=eHH = eH, so the other is G∖HG \setminus H. Since g∈gHg \in gH and g∉Hg \notin H we have gH≠HgH \ne H, whence gH=G∖HgH = G \setminus H. Exactly the same argument for right cosets shows that the right cosets partition GG into two pieces, one being HH and the other G∖HG \setminus H, and since Hg≠HHg \ne H we get Hg=G∖HHg = G \setminus H. Therefore gH=HggH = Hg, and part (4) of Theorem 3.2 gives H⊴GH \trianglelefteq G.

(3) First we check that Z(G)≤GZ(G) \le G. The identity commutes with every element, so e∈Z(G)e \in Z(G). For z,w∈Z(G)z, w \in Z(G) and x∈Gx \in G,

(zw)x=z(wx)=z(xw)=(zx)w=(xz)w=x(zw)(zw)x = z(wx) = z(xw) = (zx)w = (xz)w = x(zw)

so zw∈Z(G)zw \in Z(G). If z∈Z(G)z \in Z(G), multiplying zx=xzzx = xz by z−1z^{-1} on both sides gives xz−1=z−1xxz^{-1} = z^{-1}x, so z−1∈Z(G)z^{-1} \in Z(G). As for normality, for g∈Gg \in G and z∈Z(G)z \in Z(G) we have gzg−1=zgg−1=z∈Z(G)gzg^{-1} = zgg^{-1} = z \in Z(G), so gZ(G)g−1⊆Z(G)gZ(G)g^{-1} \subseteq Z(G), and Theorem 3.2 gives Z(G)⊴GZ(G) \trianglelefteq G.

(4) By Remark 2.5 we have ker⁡f≤G\ker f \le G. For g∈Gg \in G and n∈ker⁡fn \in \ker f,

f(gng−1)=f(g)f(n)f(g)−1=f(g) e′ f(g)−1=e′f(gng^{-1}) = f(g)f(n)f(g)^{-1} = f(g)\,e'\,f(g)^{-1} = e'

(the first equality uses the homomorphism property together with f(g−1)=f(g)−1f(g^{-1}) = f(g)^{-1} from Remark 2.5). Hence gng−1∈ker⁡fgng^{-1} \in \ker f, that is, g(ker⁡f)g−1⊆ker⁡fg(\ker f)g^{-1} \subseteq \ker f, and Theorem 3.2 gives ker⁡f⊴G\ker f \trianglelefteq G.

(5) Put N:=⋂λNλN := \bigcap_\lambda N_\lambda. Each NλN_\lambda contains ee, so e∈Ne \in N. If x,y∈Nx, y \in N then x,y∈Nλx, y \in N_\lambda for every λ\lambda, hence xy∈Nλxy \in N_\lambda and therefore xy∈Nxy \in N. Similarly x−1∈Nx^{-1} \in N. Thus N≤GN \le G. For g∈Gg \in G and x∈Nx \in N, we have x∈Nλx \in N_\lambda and Nλ⊴GN_\lambda \trianglelefteq G for every λ\lambda, so gxg−1∈Nλgxg^{-1} \in N_\lambda. As this holds for every λ\lambda, we get gxg−1∈Ngxg^{-1} \in N. Hence gNg−1⊆NgNg^{-1} \subseteq N and N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G.

Example 4.3(Standard examples of normal subgroups)

(a) The special linear group. Let KK be a field and let det⁡:GLn(K)→K×\det : \mathrm{GL}_n(K) \to K^{\times} be the determinant. Multiplicativity of the determinant, det⁡(AB)=det⁡Adet⁡B\det(AB) = \det A \det B (see Theorem 6.1[Determinants and Their Properties]), says exactly that det⁡\det is a group homomorphism, and its kernel is SLn(K)={A:det⁡A=1}\mathrm{SL}_n(K) = \{A : \det A = 1\}. Part (4) of Proposition 4.2 gives SLn(K)⊴GLn(K)\mathrm{SL}_n(K) \trianglelefteq \mathrm{GL}_n(K).

(b) The alternating group. The sign map sgn:Sn→{±1}\mathrm{sgn} : S_n \to \{\pm 1\} is a homomorphism whose kernel is the alternating group AnA_n. Hence An⊴SnA_n \trianglelefteq S_n. For n≥2n \ge 2 we have [Sn:An]=2[S_n : A_n] = 2, so this also follows from part (2) of Proposition 4.2.

(c) Trivial examples. In any group GG we have {e}⊴G\{e\} \trianglelefteq G and G⊴GG \trianglelefteq G, since g{e}g−1={geg−1}={e}g\{e\}g^{-1} = \{geg^{-1}\} = \{e\} and gGg−1=GgGg^{-1} = G. A nontrivial group with no normal subgroups other than these two is called a simple group.

(d) A non-example. The subgroup H={e,(1 2)}H = \{e, (1\,2)\} of Example 3.1 is not normal in S3S_3. Indeed, computing (1 3)(1 2)(1 3)−1(1\,3)(1\,2)(1\,3)^{-1} and using (1 3)−1=(1 3)(1\,3)^{-1} = (1\,3), we get 1↦3↦3↦11 \mapsto 3 \mapsto 3 \mapsto 1, 2↦2↦1↦32 \mapsto 2 \mapsto 1 \mapsto 3, 3↦1↦2↦23 \mapsto 1 \mapsto 2 \mapsto 2, that is, (2 3)∉H(2\,3) \notin H. The index is 3, so part (2) of Proposition 4.2 does not apply, and in fact the subgroup is not normal.

Remark 4.4

Normality is not transitive. From N⊴HN \trianglelefteq H and H⊴GH \trianglelefteq G it does not follow that N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G. Let us verify this in the dihedral group of order 8,

D4=⟨r,s∣r4=s2=e, srs−1=r−1⟩.D_4 = \langle r, s \mid r^4 = s^2 = e,\ srs^{-1} = r^{-1} \rangle .

Put H:={e,r2,s,r2s}H := \{e, r^2, s, r^2s\}. From sr2s−1=(srs−1)2=r−2=r2sr^2s^{-1} = (srs^{-1})^2 = r^{-2} = r^2 we get sr2=r2ssr^2 = r^2s, so HH is closed under products; every element has order at most 2, so H≤D4H \le D_4 with ∣H∣=4|H| = 4 and [D4:H]=2[D_4 : H] = 2. Part (2) of Proposition 4.2 therefore gives H⊴D4H \trianglelefteq D_4. Likewise N:={e,s}N := \{e, s\} is a subgroup of index 2 in HH, so N⊴HN \trianglelefteq H. But srs−1=r−1srs^{-1} = r^{-1} yields sr−1=rssr^{-1} = rs, and

rsr−1=r(sr−1)=r(rs)=r2s∉Nrsr^{-1} = r(sr^{-1}) = r(rs) = r^2s \notin N

so NN is not normal in D4D_4. The fact that a normal subgroup of a normal subgroup need not be normal in the whole group must always be kept in mind when decomposing a group in stages, that is, when working with composition series.

Theorem 5.1(Quotient group)

Let GG be a group and N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G. The operation

(aN)(bN):=(ab)N(a,b∈G)(aN)(bN) := (ab)N \qquad (a, b \in G)

on the set G/NG/N of left cosets is well defined, and G/NG/N is a group under it. Its identity element is eN=NeN = N, and the inverse of aNaN is a−1Na^{-1}N. When GG is finite, ∣G/N∣=[G:N]=∣G∣/∣N∣|G/N| = [G : N] = |G| / |N|. This group G/NG/N is called the quotient group (or factor group) of GG by NN.

Proof(Theorem 5.1)

Well-definedness. Since N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G, condition (4) of Theorem 3.2 holds, and the implication (4) ⇒\Rightarrow (1) of that theorem gives condition (W). Thus (ab)N(ab)N is determined independently of the choice of representatives.

Associativity. For a,b,c∈Ga, b, c \in G, applying the definition of the operation twice on each side gives

((aN)(bN))(cN)=((ab)N)(cN)=((ab)c)N,\bigl((aN)(bN)\bigr)(cN) = \bigl((ab)N\bigr)(cN) = \bigl((ab)c\bigr)N,(aN)((bN)(cN))=(aN)((bc)N)=(a(bc))N.(aN)\bigl((bN)(cN)\bigr) = (aN)\bigl((bc)N\bigr) = \bigl(a(bc)\bigr)N .

These agree by associativity (ab)c=a(bc)(ab)c = a(bc) in GG.

Identity. For every a∈Ga \in G we have (eN)(aN)=(ea)N=aN(eN)(aN) = (ea)N = aN and (aN)(eN)=(ae)N=aN(aN)(eN) = (ae)N = aN. Hence eN=NeN = N is the identity.

Inverses. (aN)(a−1N)=(aa−1)N=eN=N(aN)(a^{-1}N) = (aa^{-1})N = eN = N and (a−1N)(aN)=(a−1a)N=eN=N(a^{-1}N)(aN) = (a^{-1}a)N = eN = N. Hence the inverse of aNaN is a−1Na^{-1}N.

Therefore G/NG/N is a group. As for the order, ∣G/N∣|G/N| is by definition the number of left cosets, that is, the index [G:N][G:N]. If GG is finite, part (3) of Proposition 2.2 shows that GG is partitioned into [G:N][G:N] left cosets, and part (4) shows that each coset has ∣N∣|N| elements, so ∣G∣=[G:N] ∣N∣|G| = [G:N]\,|N|, that is, [G:N]=∣G∣/∣N∣[G:N] = |G|/|N| (Lagrange's theorem(Theorem 6.1)[Subgroups and Cosets]).

Note that each element of the quotient group is a subset of GG. The coset aNaN is a bag holding together all elements that differ from aa only by something in NN, and the operation in the quotient group is the multiplication of such bags. Here is a picture.

GG / NNaNbNeNaNbNπ
The natural projection π collapses each coset to a single point. All distinctions inside N are forgotten completely

Proposition 5.2(The natural projection)

Let N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G. The map

π:G⟶G/N,π(g)=gN\pi : G \longrightarrow G/N, \qquad \pi(g) = gN

is a surjective homomorphism with ker⁡π=N\ker \pi = N. It is called the natural projection (or canonical surjection).

Proof(Proposition 5.2)

Homomorphism. For a,b∈Ga, b \in G, the very definition of the operation in the quotient group gives

π(ab)=(ab)N=(aN)(bN)=π(a)π(b).\pi(ab) = (ab)N = (aN)(bN) = \pi(a)\pi(b).

Surjectivity. By definition, every element of G/NG/N can be written as gNgN for some g∈Gg \in G, and this is π(g)\pi(g).

Kernel. By Theorem 5.1 the identity of G/NG/N is N=eNN = eN. Hence

g∈ker⁡π  ⟺  gN=eN  ⟺  g−1e∈N  ⟺  g−1∈N  ⟺  g∈Ng \in \ker\pi \iff gN = eN \iff g^{-1}e \in N \iff g^{-1} \in N \iff g \in N

where the second equivalence is part (2) of Proposition 2.2 and the last holds because NN is closed under inverses. Therefore ker⁡π=N\ker\pi = N.

Corollary 5.3

For a subgroup NN of a group GG, the following are equivalent.

  1. N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G.
  2. There exist a group G′G' and a homomorphism f:G→G′f : G \to G' with N=ker⁡fN = \ker f.
Proof(Corollary 5.3)

(1)⇒(2)(1) \Rightarrow (2): the map π:G→G/N\pi : G \to G/N of Proposition 5.2 satisfies ker⁡π=N\ker \pi = N, so we may take G′=G/NG' = G/N and f=πf = \pi. (2)⇒(1)(2) \Rightarrow (1): this is precisely part (4) of Proposition 4.2.

This corollary matters conceptually. The definition of a normal subgroup, "gNg−1=NgNg^{-1} = N", looks at first like a contrived condition, but it in fact means “the part that is crushed by a homomorphism”. Determining all homomorphisms out of GG and determining all normal subgroups of GG are one and the same task. The refinement of this correspondence is the isomorphism theorem of the next chapter, G/ker⁡f≅im⁡fG/\ker f \cong \operatorname{im} f (Theorem 5.1[群の準同型定理]), treated in The isomorphism theorems for groups.

Remark 5.4

If g∈Gg \in G has finite order and gm=eg^m = e, then (gN)m=gmN=eN=N(gN)^m = g^mN = eN = N, so the order of gNgN divides the order of gg. It may, however, be strictly smaller. With G=ZG = \mathbb{Z}, N=12ZN = 12\mathbb{Z} and g=1g = 1, the element gg has infinite order while gNgN has order 12. Passing to a quotient can only lower orders, never raise them.

6. Example: the congruence group Z/nZ in full detail

Section titled “6. Example: the congruence group Z/nZ in full detail”

Let us examine the most basic quotient group down to the last detail. The stage is the additive group (Z,+)(\mathbb{Z}, +), so we write everything additively: cosets are a+Na + N and the operation is (a+N)+(b+N)=(a+b)+N(a+N) + (b+N) = (a+b)+N.

Lemma 6.1

If HH is a subgroup of the additive group Z\mathbb{Z}, then there is exactly one integer n≥0n \ge 0 with H=nZ={nk:k∈Z}H = n\mathbb{Z} = \{nk : k \in \mathbb{Z}\}.

Proof(Lemma 6.1)

Existence. If H={0}H = \{0\}, take n=0n = 0, so that H=0ZH = 0\mathbb{Z}. Assume from now on that H≠{0}H \ne \{0\}. Then there is m∈Hm \in H with m≠0m \ne 0, and since HH is closed under inverses (here −m-m), at least one of mm and −m-m is positive. Hence HH contains positive integers. By the well-ordering of the natural numbers there is a least positive integer contained in HH; call it nn.

We show nZ⊆Hn\mathbb{Z} \subseteq H. We have n∈Hn \in H, and HH is closed under addition and inverses, so by induction nk∈Hnk \in H for every k≥0k \ge 0, and also −(nk)=n(−k)∈H-(nk) = n(-k) \in H (formally one applies the principle of mathematical induction(Theorem 3.2)[Techniques of Proof] directly). Hence nZ⊆Hn\mathbb{Z} \subseteq H.

We show the reverse inclusion. Take any a∈Ha \in H and write a=qn+ra = qn + r with q,r∈Zq, r \in \mathbb{Z} and 0≤r<n0 \le r < n by the division algorithm. Since qn∈nZ⊆Hqn \in n\mathbb{Z} \subseteq H and a∈Ha \in H, we get r=a−qn∈Hr = a - qn \in H. If r>0r > 0, then rr is a positive integer in HH with r<nr < n, contradicting the minimality of nn. Hence r=0r = 0, that is, a=qn∈nZa = qn \in n\mathbb{Z}. Therefore H=nZH = n\mathbb{Z}.

Uniqueness. Suppose nZ=n′Zn\mathbb{Z} = n'\mathbb{Z} with n,n′≥0n, n' \ge 0. If n=0n = 0 then nZ={0}n\mathbb{Z} = \{0\}, so n′Z={0}n'\mathbb{Z} = \{0\} and n′=0n' = 0. If n>0n > 0, then nn is the least positive integer in nZn\mathbb{Z}, and the same holds for n′n', so n=n′n = n'.

Since Z\mathbb{Z} is abelian, part (1) of Proposition 4.2 shows that all its subgroups are normal. Hence Theorem 5.1 yields, for every n≥0n \ge 0, the quotient group

Z/nZ={ a+nZ:a∈Z }\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z} = \{\,a + n\mathbb{Z} : a \in \mathbb{Z}\,\}

We abbreviate a+nZa + n\mathbb{Z} by aˉ\bar{a}. Rewriting part (2) of Proposition 2.2 additively gives

aˉ=bˉ  ⟺  −a+b∈nZ  ⟺  n∣b−a  ⟺  a≡b(modn)\bar{a} = \bar{b} \iff -a + b \in n\mathbb{Z} \iff n \mid b - a \iff a \equiv b \pmod{n}

so the elements of Z/nZ\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z} are exactly the congruence classes modulo nn. And the assertion that the quotient operation aˉ+bˉ=a+b‾\bar{a} + \bar{b} = \overline{a+b} is well defined is nothing but the familiar statement of elementary number theory,

a≡a′, b≡b′(modn) ⟹ a+b≡a′+b′(modn)a \equiv a',\ b \equiv b' \pmod{n} \ \Longrightarrow\ a + b \equiv a' + b' \pmod{n}

(proved directly by deducing n∣(a+b)−(a′+b′)n \mid (a+b) - (a'+b') from n∣a−a′n \mid a - a' and n∣b−b′n \mid b - b'). What Theorem 3.2 tells us is that this naive fact held because nZn\mathbb{Z} is a normal subgroup.

Example 6.2(The elements of Z/nZ and their orders)

Let n≥1n \ge 1.

Number of elements. For any a∈Za \in \mathbb{Z} the division algorithm gives a=qn+ra = qn + r with 0≤r<n0 \le r < n, so aˉ=rˉ\bar{a} = \bar{r}. Hence Z/nZ={0ˉ,1ˉ,…,n−1‾}\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z} = \{\bar{0}, \bar{1}, \ldots, \overline{n-1}\}. Moreover if 0≤r<r′<n0 \le r < r' < n then 0<r′−r<n0 < r' - r < n, so n∤r′−rn \nmid r' - r and therefore rˉ≠r′ˉ\bar{r} \ne \bar{r'}. Thus these nn elements are distinct and ∣Z/nZ∣=n|\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}| = n, in agreement with the computation of [G:N][G:N] in Theorem 5.1.

Cyclicity. Since aˉ=a1ˉ\bar{a} = a\bar{1} (add 1ˉ\bar{1} to itself aa times; for a<0a < 0, add −1ˉ-\bar 1 to itself ∣a∣|a| times), we have Z/nZ=⟨1ˉ⟩\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z} = \langle \bar{1} \rangle, a cyclic group of order nn.

Orders of elements. The order of aˉ\bar{a} is n/gcd⁡(a,n)n/\gcd(a, n). Indeed, put d:=gcd⁡(a,n)d := \gcd(a,n), a=da′a = da', n=dn′n = dn' (so that gcd⁡(a′,n′)=1\gcd(a', n') = 1). Then for k≥1k \ge 1,

kaˉ=0ˉ  ⟺  n∣ka  ⟺  dn′∣kda′  ⟺  n′∣ka′  ⟺  n′∣kk\bar{a} = \bar{0} \iff n \mid ka \iff dn' \mid k d a' \iff n' \mid ka' \iff n' \mid k

where the last equivalence uses gcd⁡(a′,n′)=1\gcd(a', n') = 1 together with Euclid’s lemma (if n′∣ka′n' \mid ka' and gcd⁡(n′,a′)=1\gcd(n', a') = 1 then n′∣kn' \mid k). The least positive integer kk satisfying this is k=n′=n/dk = n' = n/d.

Generators. It follows that aˉ\bar{a} generates Z/nZ\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z} (that is, has order nn) precisely when gcd⁡(a,n)=1\gcd(a,n) = 1. Hence the number of generators equals Euler’s totient φ(n)\varphi(n).

Example 6.3(The clock group Z/12Z)

Let us compute explicitly for n=12n = 12. Using the formula ord(aˉ)=12/gcd⁡(a,12)\mathrm{ord}(\bar a) = 12/\gcd(a,12) of Example 6.2 we obtain the following table.

aa01234567891011
gcd⁡(a,12)\gcd(a,12)1212341614321
order of aˉ\bar a1126431221234612

The generators are 1ˉ,5ˉ,7ˉ,11‾\bar1, \bar5, \bar7, \overline{11}, four in number, matching φ(12)=12(1−1/2)(1−1/3)=4\varphi(12) = 12(1 - 1/2)(1-1/3) = 4.

The subgroups are ⟨dˉ⟩\langle \bar{d}\rangle (of order 12/d12/d), one for each positive divisor dd of 1212, six in all. For instance

⟨3ˉ⟩={0ˉ,3ˉ,6ˉ,9ˉ},⟨4ˉ⟩={0ˉ,4ˉ,8ˉ}.\langle \bar{3}\rangle = \{\bar{0}, \bar{3}, \bar{6}, \bar{9}\}, \qquad \langle \bar{4}\rangle = \{\bar{0}, \bar{4}, \bar{8}\} .

Since Z/12Z\mathbb{Z}/12\mathbb{Z} is abelian these are all normal, so we may form quotients again. With N:=⟨3ˉ⟩N := \langle\bar 3\rangle we get ∣(Z/12Z)/N∣=12/4=3|(\mathbb{Z}/12\mathbb{Z})/N| = 12/4 = 3, and the cosets are the three sets

0ˉ+N={0ˉ,3ˉ,6ˉ,9ˉ},1ˉ+N={1ˉ,4ˉ,7ˉ,10‾},2ˉ+N={2ˉ,5ˉ,8ˉ,11‾}\bar0 + N = \{\bar0,\bar3,\bar6,\bar9\},\quad \bar1 + N = \{\bar1,\bar4,\bar7,\overline{10}\},\quad \bar2 + N = \{\bar2,\bar5,\bar8,\overline{11}\}

Since aˉ+N\bar{a} + N depends only on the remainder of aa upon division by 3, this quotient group is isomorphic to Z/3Z\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}; as an operation it corresponds to “take the remainder modulo 12, then take the remainder modulo 3”, which is the same as “take the remainder modulo 3 from the start”. This phenomenon, that a quotient of a quotient is again a quotient, is formulated in general as the third isomorphism theorem in the next chapter (Corollary 7.2[群の準同型定理]).

Example 7.1(Quotients of the symmetric group, the general linear group and the real line)

(a) S3/A3S_3/A_3. The subgroup A3={e,(1 2 3),(1 3 2)}A_3 = \{e, (1\,2\,3), (1\,3\,2)\} has index 2, so part (2) of Proposition 4.2 gives A3⊴S3A_3 \trianglelefteq S_3. The quotient group consists of the two elements {A3, (1 2)A3}\{A_3,\ (1\,2)A_3\}, where A3A_3 is the set of all even permutations and (1 2)A3(1\,2)A_3 the set of all odd ones. The operation in the quotient is exactly the rule

(even)(even)=even,(even)(odd)=odd,(odd)(odd)=even(\text{even})(\text{even}) = \text{even},\quad (\text{even})(\text{odd}) = \text{odd},\quad (\text{odd})(\text{odd}) = \text{even}

and S3/A3≅Z/2ZS_3/A_3 \cong \mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}. The “contents” of a permutation are forgotten entirely; only the parity survives.

(b) GLn(R)/SLn(R)\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})/\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbb{R}). By Example 4.3 (a) we have SLn(R)⊴GLn(R)\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbb{R}) \trianglelefteq \mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R}). Writing S:=SLn(R)S := \mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbb{R}), part (2) of Proposition 2.2 gives

AS=BS  ⟺  A−1B∈S  ⟺  det⁡(A−1B)=1  ⟺  det⁡A=det⁡BAS = BS \iff A^{-1}B \in S \iff \det(A^{-1}B) = 1 \iff \det A = \det B

so the cosets correspond bijectively to the values of the determinant. The operation is (AS)(BS)=(AB)S(AS)(BS) = (AB)S, and determinants multiply as det⁡(AB)=det⁡Adet⁡B\det(AB) = \det A \det B, so GLn(R)/SLn(R)≅R×\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})/\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbb{R}) \cong \mathbb{R}^{\times}. The quotient group is the world in which a matrix is seen through its determinant alone.

(c) R/Z\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}. Since (R,+)(\mathbb{R}, +) is abelian we have Z⊴R\mathbb{Z} \trianglelefteq \mathbb{R} and may form R/Z\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}. As x+Z=y+Zx + \mathbb{Z} = y + \mathbb{Z} is equivalent to x−y∈Zx - y \in \mathbb{Z}, each coset has exactly one representative in the interval [0,1)[0,1), namely the fractional part of xx. The operation is “add and discard the integer part”, that is, addition mod 1\mathrm{mod}\ 1. The map x+Z↦e2πixx + \mathbb{Z} \mapsto e^{2\pi i x} is well defined (replacing xx by x+mx + m does not change the value, since e2πim=1e^{2\pi i m} = 1) and is a bijective homomorphism, so R/Z\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z} is isomorphic to the multiplicative group of the unit circle in the complex plane. Winding an infinite line into a circle, one unit of length at a time, is in group-theoretic terms exactly the passage to a quotient.

What these examples have in common is that the quotient group represents what remains after the information we wish to discard has been discarded. In (a) the fine detail of a permutation is discarded and only the parity kept; in (b) the fine detail of a matrix is discarded and only the determinant kept; in (c) the integer part of a real number is discarded and only the fractional part kept. In each case the totality of the discarded information is precisely the normal subgroup NN, and what remains is the quotient group G/NG/N. What Corollary 5.3 said is that this splitting into “discarded” and “retained” is the same thing as a single homomorphism.

The general theory of groups starts from Introduction to group theory: the definition and examples, but the basic policy when facing the great problem of classifying groups is: find a normal subgroup NN and decompose into NN and G/NG/N. The groups for which this policy finally stops working, the simple groups, are the “elementary particles” of the decomposition. Galois theory, which decides the solvability of an equation by decomposing a group (An invitation to Galois theory), is likewise an argument tracing a chain of normal subgroups (Theorem 5.4[ガロア理論への招待]).

Exercise 8.1Easy

In Z/18Z\mathbb{Z}/18\mathbb{Z}, find the order of 12‾\overline{12} and list all elements of ⟨12‾⟩\langle \overline{12}\rangle. Then find the order of the quotient group (Z/18Z)/⟨12‾⟩(\mathbb{Z}/18\mathbb{Z})/\langle\overline{12}\rangle.

Solution

By Example 6.2 the order of 12‾\overline{12} is 18/gcd⁡(12,18)=18/6=318/\gcd(12,18) = 18/6 = 3. Hence

⟨12‾⟩={0ˉ, 12‾, 24‾}={0ˉ, 12‾, 6ˉ}\langle \overline{12}\rangle = \{\bar 0,\ \overline{12},\ \overline{24}\} = \{\bar 0,\ \overline{12},\ \bar 6\}

(since 24=18+624 = 18 + 6, we have 24‾=6ˉ\overline{24} = \bar 6). As Z/18Z\mathbb{Z}/18\mathbb{Z} is abelian, part (1) of Proposition 4.2 shows this subgroup is normal, and the order formula in Theorem 5.1 gives

∣(Z/18Z)/⟨12‾⟩∣=183=6.\bigl|(\mathbb{Z}/18\mathbb{Z})/\langle\overline{12}\rangle\bigr| = \frac{18}{3} = 6 .

Note that ⟨12‾⟩=⟨6ˉ⟩\langle\overline{12}\rangle = \langle\bar 6\rangle, the subgroup corresponding to the divisor 66 of 1818.

Exercise 8.2Standard

Let N,M⊴GN, M \trianglelefteq G. Show that N∩MN \cap M and NM:={nm:n∈N, m∈M}NM := \{nm : n \in N,\ m \in M\} are both normal subgroups of GG.

Solution

The case of N∩MN \cap M. Apply part (5) of Proposition 4.2 with Λ={1,2}\Lambda = \{1,2\}, N1=NN_1 = N, N2=MN_2 = M; the claim follows at once.

The case of NMNM. First we show it is a subgroup. We have e=ee∈NMe = ee \in NM. To see closure under products, take n1m1, n2m2∈NMn_1m_1,\ n_2m_2 \in NM. Since M⊴GM \trianglelefteq G we have n2−1m1n2∈Mn_2^{-1}m_1n_2 \in M; calling this element m′m', we get m1n2=n2m′m_1 n_2 = n_2 m'. Hence

(n1m1)(n2m2)=n1(m1n2)m2=n1n2m′m2∈NM(n_1m_1)(n_2m_2) = n_1(m_1n_2)m_2 = n_1n_2m'm_2 \in NM

(as n1n2∈Nn_1n_2 \in N and m′m2∈Mm'm_2 \in M). As for inverses, N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G gives m−1n−1m∈Nm^{-1}n^{-1}m \in N, so

(nm)−1=m−1n−1=(m−1n−1m) m−1∈NM.(nm)^{-1} = m^{-1}n^{-1} = (m^{-1}n^{-1}m)\,m^{-1} \in NM .

Therefore NM≤GNM \le G.

Next, normality. For g∈Gg \in G, n∈Nn \in N and m∈Mm \in M, inserting g−1g=eg^{-1}g = e gives

g(nm)g−1=(gng−1)(gmg−1)∈NMg(nm)g^{-1} = (gng^{-1})(gmg^{-1}) \in NM

(here gng−1∈Ngng^{-1} \in N because N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G, and gmg−1∈Mgmg^{-1} \in M because M⊴GM \trianglelefteq G). Hence g(NM)g−1⊆NMg(NM)g^{-1} \subseteq NM for every gg, and part (2) of Theorem 3.2 gives NM⊴GNM \trianglelefteq G.

Note that if the normality of MM is dropped and MM is merely a subgroup, then NMNM is still a subgroup (use N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G in place of M⊴GM \trianglelefteq G in the computation above) but need not be normal.

Exercise 8.3Standard

Let GG be a group. Show that if the quotient group G/Z(G)G/Z(G) is cyclic, then GG is abelian. Using this, show that if ∣G∣=p2|G| = p^2 with pp prime, then GG is abelian. You may use Lagrange’s theorem and the fact that a group of prime order is cyclic. You may also assume Z(G)≠{e}Z(G) \ne \{e\} (that the centre of a pp-group is nontrivial).

Solution

Write Z:=Z(G)Z := Z(G). By part (3) of Proposition 4.2 we have Z⊴GZ \trianglelefteq G, so the quotient group G/ZG/Z is defined.

First part. Suppose G/Z=⟨gZ⟩G/Z = \langle gZ\rangle. Take any x∈Gx \in G. Then xZ∈G/ZxZ \in G/Z, so xZ=(gZ)k=gkZxZ = (gZ)^k = g^kZ for some integer kk. By part (2) of Proposition 2.2 we have (gk)−1x∈Z(g^k)^{-1}x \in Z, so putting z:=g−kx∈Zz := g^{-k}x \in Z we may write x=gkzx = g^kz. Similarly any y∈Gy \in G can be written y=glwy = g^lw with w∈Zw \in Z. Since zz and ww commute with every element of GG,

xy=gkz glw=gkglzw=gk+lzw,yx=glw gkz=glgkwz=gk+lwz.xy = g^kz\,g^lw = g^kg^lzw = g^{k+l}zw, \qquad yx = g^lw\,g^kz = g^lg^kwz = g^{k+l}wz .

From z,w∈Zz, w \in Z we get zw=wzzw = wz (apply the definition of the centre to z∈Zz \in Z and w∈Gw \in G, say), so xy=yxxy = yx. As xx and yy were arbitrary, GG is abelian.

Second part. Suppose ∣G∣=p2|G| = p^2. Since Z≤GZ \le G, Lagrange’s theorem gives ∣Z∣∈{1,p,p2}|Z| \in \{1, p, p^2\}, and ∣Z∣≠1|Z| \ne 1 by hypothesis. If ∣Z∣=p2|Z| = p^2 then Z=GZ = G and GG is abelian. We rule out the case ∣Z∣=p|Z| = p. In that case Theorem 5.1 gives ∣G/Z∣=p2/p=p|G/Z| = p^2/p = p, so G/ZG/Z is cyclic, a group of prime order being cyclic. By the first part GG is then abelian, that is, Z=GZ = G and ∣Z∣=p2|Z| = p^2, contradicting ∣Z∣=p|Z| = p. Hence ∣Z∣=p2|Z| = p^2 is the only possibility and GG is abelian.

Exercise 8.4Hard

Show that the alternating group A4A_4 (of order 12) has no subgroup of order 6. In particular, the converse of Lagrange’s theorem is false.

Solution

Suppose there were H≤A4H \le A_4 with ∣H∣=6|H| = 6. The order formula of Theorem 5.1 gives [A4:H]=12/6=2[A_4 : H] = 12/6 = 2, so part (2) of Proposition 4.2 gives H⊴A4H \trianglelefteq A_4. Hence the quotient group A4/HA_4/H is defined and has order 2.

In a group of order 2, u2u^2 is the identity for every element uu (clear if uu is the identity; otherwise uu has order 2 by Lagrange’s theorem). Let π:A4→A4/H\pi : A_4 \to A_4/H be the natural projection (Proposition 5.2). Then for every x∈A4x \in A_4,

π(x2)=π(x)2=H\pi(x^2) = \pi(x)^2 = H

so x2∈ker⁡π=Hx^2 \in \ker\pi = H.

Now let σ∈A4\sigma \in A_4 be a 3-cycle. Since σ3=e\sigma^3 = e, we have (σ2)2=σ4=σ(\sigma^2)^2 = \sigma^4 = \sigma, and applying the fact above with x=σ2x = \sigma^2 gives σ=(σ2)2∈H\sigma = (\sigma^2)^2 \in H. Thus every 3-cycle in A4A_4 lies in HH.

The number of 3-cycles on {1,2,3,4}\{1,2,3,4\} is 4×2=84 \times 2 = 8: there are (43)=4\binom{4}{3} = 4 ways to choose the three letters moved, and 22 ways to cycle the chosen three. A 3-cycle is a product of two transpositions ((a b c)=(a b)(b c)(a\,b\,c) = (a\,b)(b\,c)), hence even, so all of them lie in A4A_4. Therefore ∣H∣≥8+1=9|H| \ge 8 + 1 = 9 (counting the identity as well), contradicting ∣H∣=6|H| = 6.

Hence no subgroup of order 6 exists. Since 6∣126 \mid 12 and yet there is no subgroup of order 6, the converse of Lagrange’s theorem — that for every divisor dd of ∣G∣|G| there is a subgroup of order dd — is false.

  • Matsuzaka Kazuo, Daisūkei Nyūmon (Introduction to Algebraic Systems), Iwanami Shoten, 1976 (in Japanese) — Chapter 3 (group theory) gives a detailed account of cosets, normal subgroups and quotient groups. One of the most careful introductions available in Japanese.
  • Katsura Toshiyuki, Daisūgaku I: Gun to Kan (Algebra I: Groups and Rings), University of Tokyo Press, 2004 (in Japanese) — Chapter 1. A concise treatment of normal subgroups and the isomorphism theorems.
  • Yukie Akihiko, Daisūgaku 1: Gunron Nyūmon (Algebra 1: Introduction to Group Theory), Nippon Hyoron Sha, 2010 (in Japanese) — Chapter 2. Rich in concrete examples, well suited to practising computations in SnS_n and DnD_n.
  • S. Lang, Algebra, 3rd revised ed., Springer GTM 211, 2002 — Chapter I (Groups). Organizes quotient groups and the isomorphism theorems in categorical language.
  • D. S. Dummit and R. M. Foote, Abstract Algebra, 3rd ed., Wiley, 2004 — Chapter 3 (Quotient Groups and Homomorphisms). Contains the tests for normality together with a wealth of exercises.
  • C. F. Gauss, Disquisitiones Arithmeticae, 1801 — Chapter 1. The original source for the notation of congruences and for their compatibility with addition, subtraction and multiplication.

Appendix: A normal subgroup is a union of conjugacy classes

Section titled “Appendix: A normal subgroup is a union of conjugacy classes”

The partition by conjugacy. The relation x≈y  ⟺  ∃g∈G, y=gxg−1x \approx y \iff \exists g \in G,\ y = gxg^{-1} on a group GG is an equivalence relation: it is reflexive because x=exe−1x = exe^{-1}; symmetric because y=gxg−1y = gxg^{-1} gives x=g−1y(g−1)−1x = g^{-1}y(g^{-1})^{-1}; and transitive because y=gxg−1y = gxg^{-1} and z=hyh−1z = hyh^{-1} give z=(hg)x(hg)−1z = (hg)x(hg)^{-1}. Its equivalence classes are called conjugacy classes. Directly from the definition, for a subgroup N≤GN \le G,

N⊴G  ⟺  N is a union of conjugacy classesN \trianglelefteq G \iff N \text{ is a union of conjugacy classes}

Indeed, if N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G then all conjugates gxg−1gxg^{-1} of x∈Nx \in N lie in NN, so NN contains the whole conjugacy class of xx; conversely if NN is a union of conjugacy classes then gNg−1⊆NgNg^{-1} \subseteq N for every gg, so NN is normal by Theorem 3.2. This reformulation is a practical tool when listing all normal subgroups of a finite group, because the constraint that the sizes of the classes must sum to ∣N∣|N| and that ∣N∣|N| must divide ∣G∣|G| (Lagrange’s theorem) bites hard.

The case of S3S_3. The conjugacy classes of S3S_3 are three: {e}\{e\} (one element), the class of transpositions {(1 2),(1 3),(2 3)}\{(1\,2),(1\,3),(2\,3)\} (three elements), and the class of 3-cycles {(1 2 3),(1 3 2)}\{(1\,2\,3),(1\,3\,2)\} (two elements). The unions containing ee whose size divides 66 are 11, 1+2=31+2 = 3 and 1+3+2=61+3+2 = 6, three possibilities in all (note that 1+3=41+3 = 4 does not divide 6). The corresponding subsets are {e}\{e\}, A3A_3 and S3S_3, all of which are subgroups. Hence the normal subgroups of S3S_3 are exactly {e}, A3, S3\{e\},\ A_3,\ S_3. That the subgroup {e,(1 2)}\{e,(1\,2)\} of Example 3.1 was not normal is now immediate: it contains only part of the class of transpositions.

The case of A4A_4. Consider V:={e, (1 2)(3 4), (1 3)(2 4), (1 4)(2 3)}V := \{e,\ (1\,2)(3\,4),\ (1\,3)(2\,4),\ (1\,4)(2\,3)\}. Conjugation obeys the rule σ(a b)(c d)σ−1=(σ(a) σ(b))(σ(c) σ(d))\sigma (a\,b)(c\,d) \sigma^{-1} = (\sigma(a)\,\sigma(b))(\sigma(c)\,\sigma(d)), so conjugating (1 2)(3 4)(1\,2)(3\,4) by σ=(1 2 3)\sigma = (1\,2\,3) yields (2 3)(1 4)(2\,3)(1\,4), and by σ=(1 3 2)\sigma = (1\,3\,2) yields (3 1)(2 4)(3\,1)(2\,4). Thus the three double transpositions are conjugate to one another inside A4A_4, and VV is the union of the class {e}\{e\} with this three-element class. Once one checks that VV is a subgroup (that the product of two double transpositions is the third, and that every element has order 2), the criterion above gives V⊴A4V \trianglelefteq A_4. By Theorem 5.1 we have ∣A4/V∣=12/4=3|A_4/V| = 12/4 = 3, and this quotient group is cyclic of order 3. Combined with Exercise 8.4, this reveals an asymmetric picture: A4A_4 has no subgroup of order 6, yet it has a normal subgroup of order 4.

not audited

Report an error in this article ・Operated by: Mugen Giken LLC ・Pricing ・Terms ・Legal notice

© 2026 夢現技研合同会社 ・Code samples are MIT licensed.