Tell me more ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 3 down vote favorite

I need help to proof this result:

"Let G be a group such that the intersection of all its subgroups other than $\{1\}$ is a subgroup different than $\{1\}$. Then all its elements have a finite order".

I know I must think of an element $g$ of infinite order. That will imply that every subgroup has infinite order (because it will contain an element like $g^k$). After this, I don't know which step I can take. Can someone help?

share|improve this question
1  
Consider an element of infinite order $g$ and then $<g>$. Since the intersection of all subgroups is nontrivial, every subgroup of $G$ must contain at least one element of $<g>$, which is a power of $g$, thus having infinite order. – Gustavo Marra Mar 30 '12 at 2:03

1 Answer

up vote 7 down vote accepted

If there is an element $g$ of infinite order, consider the intersection of all subgroups of $(g)$. What is it?

share|improve this answer
Well, it must be $\{1\}$ because all subgroups of $<g>$ are cyclic. Since the intersection is a group, I can take an arbitrary power of $g$ and show that it doesn't belong to the intersection. – Gustavo Marra Mar 30 '12 at 2:16
It is $\{1\}$ but «because all subgroups of $(g)$ are cyclic» is not a proof of that. I cannot see in what way the second sentence in your comment is related to neither your question not my answer :) – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez♦ Mar 30 '12 at 2:18
Well, you can suppose that there's a $k$ integer such that $g^k$ is in the intersection of all subgroups of G. If it is in the intersection, then it must belong to <g^l> where $k$ and $l$ are relatively primes. But that's not possible; and then, since the intersection is a group, it must be the trivial group $\{ 1\}$, right? With this I can conclude the exercise. – Gustavo Marra Mar 30 '12 at 2:24
I'm trying to proof that this intersection of all subgroups of $<g>$ is $\{1\}$. – Gustavo Marra Mar 30 '12 at 2:25
1  
@GustavoMarra: To prove this, for an arbitrary $n\in\mathbb{Z}$ you need to find a subgroup which doesn't contain $n$. So...pick a number large than $n$, $|n|+1$ say...and then...can you think of a subgroup which contains $|n|+1$ but not $n$? If you are struggling, you could turn this on its head - instead of trying to find a subgroup which does not contain $n$, think about what the homomorphic images of $\mathbb{Z}$ are. They are modulo arithmetic, right? So, can you pick an integer $m$ such that $n\not\equiv 0\text{ mod }m$? So, what does this mean?...... – user1729 Mar 30 '12 at 8:50

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.