Converse of Lagrange's theorem fails for the alternating group A4
Counterexample
The converse of Lagrange's theorem would say this. If is a finite group and is a positive divisor of , then has a subgroup of order . This is false. Let be the group of the even permutations of , under composition. It has order , and divides , but has no subgroup of order .
Remarks
The elements of are the identity, the three products of two disjoint transpositions, and the eight -cycles. A subgroup of order would have index , and thus it would contain the square of each element of . The square of each -cycle is a -cycle, and each -cycle is such a square. So would contain all eight -cycles, which is too many. The group is the smallest group for which the converse fails.
Explanations
L1 human
Lagrange's theorem says which sizes a subgroup can have, but it does not promise that each allowed size occurs. The group has elements, and is an allowed size, but no subgroup has elements. For cyclic groups the converse is true, so a counterexample must be a group that is not cyclic.
What this node needs for W1
- an inventory row: the row of the inventory that the node accounts for (0 of 1)
- edge refutes or not_instance_of out (0 of 1)
The writing levels say how complete the text of a node is. They do not measure its truth.
What this needs
To read this node, read these 3 nodes in this order. The foundations come first, and the list ends with this node.
- no evidence level
- Group concept
- Lagrange's theorem statement
- Converse of Lagrange's theorem fails for the alternating group A4 counterexample
Sources
- Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_theorem_(group_theory), Existence of subgroups of given order
- Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange's_theorem_(group_theory), Counterexample of the converse of Lagrange's theorem
What links here
No node links to this node yet.