Take the 2-minute tour ×
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.

I have the following question:

If I have an infinite subgroup $U$ of a group $G$ and a subgroup $H$ of finite index in $G$ then how can I show that the intersection of $U\cap H$ is non-trivial???

Thanks for help.

share|improve this question
add comment

4 Answers

up vote 1 down vote accepted

$N=\cap H^g$ is normal and finite index in $G$, and by the second isomorphism theorem $U/U\cap N \cong UN/N\le G/N$, which is a finite group.

share|improve this answer
    
Do you not need finitely generated for $\cap H^g$ to be of finite index? –  user1729 May 22 '12 at 9:13
    
Nice. Thank you. –  Peter May 22 '12 at 10:12
1  
@user1729: You just need $H$ to be of finite index. When $H$ has index $n$, there is a homomorphism from $G$ to $S_n$ (coset action) where the kernel is $\cap H^g$ (the normal core). By the first isomorphism theorem $G/\cap H^g$ is finite since $S_n$ is. –  Mikko Korhonen May 22 '12 at 14:24
    
@m.k.: Ah yes, I was thinking you needed to intersect all the subgroups of index $n$ (which will give you characteristic). –  user1729 May 22 '12 at 14:47
add comment

Restrict the map $G\to G/H$ to $U$ giving a map $f:U\to G/H$. For every left coset $y=uH\in f(U)\subseteq G/H$ with $u\in U$ one has $f^{-1}(y)=y\cap U=u(U\cap H)$ (the last equality is obtained by checking both inclusions). Now since $G/H$ is finite, $U=\bigcup_{y\in f(U)}f^{-1}(y)$ would be a finite union of finite sets if $U\cap H$ were finite, which cannot be true since $U$ is infinite. So $U\cap H$ is not finite, and even less trivial.

share|improve this answer
    
Clear exhibition of the use of cosets, but $H$ is not supposed to be normal, is it? If it is not normal, how can one define the map $f$? So in any case, it appears similar to the above answer. And why is the intersection of $U$ with a point $y$ equal to a coset of $U$ intersection $H$? –  awllower May 24 '12 at 5:51
1  
@awllower: The map $p:G\to G/H$ is defined for every subgroup $H$ of $G$, not necessarily normal. It is the canonical projection to the set $G/H$ of left cosets (oops, I got left and right wrong in my answer; will correct it), which sends every $g\in G$ to its left coset $gH$. As a consequence if $y\in G/H$ is a left coset, then $p^{-1}(y)=\{ g\in G\mid p(g)=y\}$ is equal to $y$ (viewed now as a subset of $G$). In the restriction $f$ of $p$ to $U$ we must intersect these fibers with $U$ to get a subset of the domain of $f$. For $y\cap U=u(U\cap H)$, check $\subseteq$ and $\supseteq$ as said. –  Marc van Leeuwen May 24 '12 at 8:02
add comment

If $U$ is an infinite subgroup of $G$ with and $H$ is a finite-index subgroup of $G$ then $U\cap H\neq 1$.

Proof:

There exists a finite-index subgroup of $G$, $H^{\prime}$ say, such that $H^{\prime}\lhd G$ and $H^{\prime}\leq H$. Clearly, if $H^{\prime}\cap U\neq 1$ then $H\cap U\neq 1$. This means that we can assume $H\lhd G$.

Now, look at $G/H$. As $U$ is infinite, we must have that there exists some $u, v\in U$ such that $uH=vH\Rightarrow uv^{-1}\in H$. As $u, v\in U$ we have $uv^{-1}\in U\cap H$ and we're done.

I believe this actually means that if $U\cap H=1$ $U$ then $G=K\rtimes V$ where $V$ is finite (so $K$ has finite index in $G$) and $U\leq V$, $H\leq K$. This is because you need to find a copy of $U$ in $G/H$, so it must somehow split...but the problem is the "somehow". Certainly, $H\rtimes U$ must have finite index in $G$, where $H$ is the finite-index normal subgroup we got above (and so $U$ must be finite).

share|improve this answer
    
It is not assumed that $U$ has infinite index in $G$. –  Brian M. Scott May 22 '12 at 8:55
    
@BrianM.Scott Hmm...it seems I can't read. Ah well, I don't use that fact anywhere anyway! –  user1729 May 22 '12 at 8:58
    
Why does $uv^{-1}\in H$ implies $u,v\in H$? –  Peter May 22 '12 at 10:17
    
@Peter: No, that's a typo. I meant $u, v\in U$. This means that $uv^{-1}\in U$, so $uv^{-1}\in U\cap H$. –  user1729 May 22 '12 at 10:20
    
Ah. Okay. It seems, that I can't read, too. ;-) –  Peter May 22 '12 at 10:30
show 1 more comment

HINT: Let $K=U\cap H$. Suppose that $u\in U$. Clearly $uK\subseteq U\cap uH$. Suppose that $h\in H$ and $uh\in U\cap uH$; then $h=u^{-1}(uh)\in U\cap H=K$, so $uh\in uK$. Thus, $uK=U\cap uH$. This is a problem if $K$ is trivial; why?

share|improve this answer
1  
If K is trivial we get infinitely many left cosets and so the index of H would be infinte. Thanks! –  Peter May 22 '12 at 10:01
add comment

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.