Last week I did the Sylow theorems in class, and I want to share how I do them with my visual approach to groups.
To start, here are the 5 groups of order 12. Note how there are "towers of p-groups", for p=2 and p=3.
This is what the 1st Sylow theorem guarantees.
1/17
The key lemma needed for the Sylow theorems is:
"If a p-group G acts on S, then |Fix|≡|S| mod p."
Here's a picture proof of that, adapted from @nathancarter5's fantastic "Visual Group Theory" book.
2/17
As a corollary of this, by letting a p-group act on its subgroups by conjugation:
"p-groups cannot have fully unnormal subgroups"
Said differently, the normalizer of any subgroup strictly gets bigger. Here's what I mean by that concept.
3/17
Here are two pictures for why that's true for subgroups of p-groups, which is a direct application of: "If a p-group G acts on S, then |Fix|≡|S| mod p."
I describe the 2nd picture as:
"# blue marbles mod p = total # marbles mod p"
4/17
It's straightforward to extend this to non-Sylow p-subgroups of arbitrary finite groups.
Here's a picture of that. Note that a "non-Sylow p-subgroup" just means a non-maximal p-subgroup.
5/17
Before we begin the Sylow theorems, let's consider a "mystery group" of order 12, and see how much we can uncover about its structure.
6/17
The first Sylow theorem simply says that for any prime p dividing |G|, there is a "complete saturated p-subgroup tower" in the subgroup lattice, like in the 1st picture of this thread.
Tip: throughout, picture chains of p-subgroups rising vertically, not horizontally.
7/17
The proof is by induction. Given a non-Sylow p-subgroup H of order p^k, consider the (non-trivial) p-group N_G(H)/H, and find an element (coset!) of order p.
The union of those cosets is a subgroup of order p^{k+1}.
Here's a visual, also adapted from @nathancarter5's VGT.
8/17
By the 1st Sylow theorem, we can say a bit more about our mystery group of order 12.
9/17
The 2nd Sylow theorem says that all subgroups at the top of the p-subgroup tower are conjugate. Note how I denoted this with dashed lines.
In particular, the following situation is impossible.
10/17
I actually prove a stronger version -- the "strong 2nd Sylow theorem":
If H is p-Sylow, then every p-subgroup is conjugate to some subgroup of H. This is best seen by a picture.
The only question is: "how to we find such an element g"?
11/17
We let some other Sylow p-subgroup H' act on the cosets of H.
Any element g such that Hg is a fixed point will work!
So why *is* there a fixed point? |S|=[G:H] is not a multiple of p, and we immediately get |Fix|≡|S| mod p ≠ 0. Done!
12/17
Let's do a quick corollary. Given only the subgroup lattice for A_5, we can see by inspection why it's simple.
Can you fill in the details? Notice that the conjugacy classes of the Sylow p-subgroups are dashed.
13/17
Notice how in A_5, if you take the normalizer of a p-subgroup, you "go up", but if you do it again, you stay put.
This is nicely characterized by the terminology of "moderately unnormal" and "fully unnormal" that I introduced earlier.
14/17
Finally, the 3rd Sylow theorem: the number of Sylow p-subgroups n_p, satisfies:
(1) n_p | m (2) n_p ≡ 1 mod p
For (1), let G act on Syl(G) by conjugation. There's 1 orbit, so the result is immediate by the orbit-stabilizer theorem: n_p = |orb(H)| = [G:stab(H)].
15/17
For (2), let a Sylow p-subgroup P act on Syl(G), and show that the only fixed point is P. The result now follows from our "fixed point lemma":
1 = |Fix| ≡ n_p mod p.
16/17
Here's a final version of our "mystery group of order 12". From here, we're a few steps from formally classifying all 5 groups of order 12; here are the lattices again.
Tip: rely heavily on lattices when teaching Sylow theory. Draw the p-subgroup towers vertically!
17/17
Oops, I only included the lattices of the two abelian groups of order 12 in that last tweet. Here are the 3 non-abelian ones:
1. the dihedral group D_6 2. the diciclic group Dic_6 3. the alternating group A_4
18/17
***Correction on page 14/17:
“normalizer of a SYLOW p-subgroup”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Now that my #VisualAlgebra class is in the books, I want to post a long "meta thread" of all 16 weekly threads, with daily summaries. Here's my entire class, including lectures, HW, & exams, in one convenient place.
And stayed tuned for some surprise announcements below!👇🧵
We started #Week1 of #VisualAlgebra with a few quotes from "A Mathematician's Apology" on the beauty of mathematics, and then saw Cayley diagrams for the symmetries of the rectangle and triangle.
In #Week2 of #VisualAlgebra, we explored the Rubik's cube, more Cayley diagrams, group presentations, the impossibility of the word & halting problems, and we classified all frieze groups.
I woke up a few days ago with the sobering realization: actually, I do NOT really understand groups actions.
Spoiler: I do now, but it took some work. And now I realize how incomplete my understanding was. 😳
Let me explain, I think some of you might enjoy this!
1/12 🧵👇
See those "orbit diagrams" above? I got to thinking: "how can we characterize all possible diagrams?" Equivalently, all transitive actions of D_4 (or a group G in general).
Playing around with things, I came up with a few more. But I still didn't know the answer. Do you?
2/12
For example, how many of the following are possible?
Before reading on, see if you can answer this, and generalize to arbitrary groups.
There's a simple elegant answer, that I was never aware of. And I suspect that the majority of people who teach algebra aren't either.
Finishing up our🧵👇 #VisualAlgebra class in #Week15 with divisibility and factorization. I'm a little short on visuals, but here are two really nice ones on what we'll be covering, made by @linguanumerate.
Henceforth, we'll assume that R is an integral domain.
1/8 Mon
The integers have nice properties that we usually take for granted:
--multiplication commutes
--there aren't zero divisors
--every nonzero number can be factored into primes
--any 2 nonzero numbers have a unique gcd and lcm
--the Euclidean algorithm can compute these
2/8 M
Some, but not all of these hold in general integral domains. This is what we'd like understand!
If b=ac, we say "a divides b", or "b is a multiple of a".
If a | b and b | a, they're "associates", written a~b.
We started #Week11 of #VisualAlgebra with a new diagram of one of the isomorphism theorems. I made this over spring break. The concept is due to Douglas Hofstadter (author of "Gödel, Escher, Bach"), who calls this a "pizza diagram".
1/14 Mon 🧵👇
Though we constructed semidirect products visually last week, we haven't yet seen the algebraic definition. On Friday, we saw inner automorphisms, which was the last step we needed.
Recall the analogy for A⋊B:
A = automorphism, B = "balloon".
2/14 M
Next, we asked when a group G is isomorphic to a direct product or semidirect product of its subgroups, N & H.
Here are two examples of groups that we are very familiar with.
Here are two ways to think about it. One involves cosets as "boxes" in a grid, and the other is in terms of the subgroup lattice: to find the index [H:K], just take the product of the edges b/w them.
1/8 Mon
Pause for a quick comment about cosets in additive groups. Don't forget to write a+H, rather than aH. Here's a nice way to see the equality of a left coset and a right coset.
2/8 M
Next, we proved that if [G:H]=2, then H is normal. Here's a "picture proof": one left (resp., right) coset is H, and the other is G-H.
WEEK 2 of #VisualAlgebra! This is only Lecture #2 of the class.
Monday was MLK Day, but on Wed, we learned about the Rubik's cube! I got to show up my rare signed cube with Ernő Rubik himself from 2010! Did a shout out to @cubes_art's amazing talents.
1/8 W
We learned some neat facts about the Rubik's cube, like how the group has just 6 generators, but 4.3 x 10^{19} elements, and a Cayley diagram with diameter of 20 or 26, depending on whether you count a 180 degree twists as 1 or 2 moves.
2/8 W
I showed 3 different groups of order 8, and asked if any are isomorphic. At this point, all they know about what that means is that two groups must have identical Cayley diagrams *for some generating set*.