Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

$\alpha : G \to H$ is a surjective homomorphism. And $U \subset G$ is a subgroup of $G$. Verfiy the claim -

The image of $U$, ie $\alpha(U)$, is a subgroup of $H$, and if $U$ is normal in $G$, then $\alpha(U)$ is normal in $H$.


Firstly, do I have to show $\alpha(U)$, is a subgroup of $H$ or is that statement just a statement of fact as part of the question?

Anyway here is what I have done..taking it as a given that $\alpha(U)$, is a subgroup of $H$ -

As $U$ is normal we have

$U = gUg^{-1}$

$\alpha(U) = \alpha(gUg^1) =$ {applying homomorphic mapping into H} = $\alpha(g)\alpha(U)\alpha(g^{-1})$

Is that correct? I have a feeling I should take the $-1$ exponent outside the bracket as an extra final step or is that superfluous?

share|cite|improve this question
The hypotheses should include the statement that $U$ is a subgroup of $G$. You must verify (1) that $\alpha[U]$ is a subgroup of $H$, and (2) that if $U$ is normal in $G$, than $\alpha[U]$ is normal in $H$. Yes, you need to finish the proof of (2) by pulling the inverse outside, so that the last factor is $(\alpha(g))^{-1}$. – Brian M. Scott Oct 23 '12 at 0:04
1. Yes, if you are uncertain, try to prove it. 2. Yes, final step, inverse out. – Berci Oct 23 '12 at 0:05
@BrianM.Scott: Yes I have edited in that it $U$ is a subgroup of $G$. – Jim_CS Oct 23 '12 at 0:06
up vote 1 down vote accepted

To show that $\alpha(U)$ is a normal subgroup, you need to prove that $\alpha(U) = x \alpha(U) x^{-1}$ for all $x \in H$. But any $x \in H$ can be written in the form $\alpha(g)$ for $g \in G$ since $\alpha$ is surjective. Thus, you need only prove that $\alpha(U) = \alpha(g) \alpha(U) \alpha(g)^{-1}$ for all $g \in G$. Note the $-1$ exponent is "on the outside", so you really do need to take that last step as you suspected.

And yes, as written it is meant that you should prove that $\alpha(U)$ is a subgroup. The proof requires you to carefully work through the definition/criterion for being a subgroup, but nothing beyond that.

Also, +1 for showing your reasoning and clearly indicating what you are unsure of.

share|cite|improve this answer
I think you must have meant $\,\alpha(U)=x\alpha(U)x^{-1}\,$ for all $\,x\in H\,$ ... – DonAntonio Oct 23 '12 at 2:53
Yes, thanks. :) I've corrected the mistake. – Michael Joyce Oct 23 '12 at 3:35

You have to prove that $\alpha(U)$ is normal subgroup in $H$, so for all $x\in H$, one has $x\cdot \alpha(U)\cdot x^{-1} \subseteq \alpha(U)$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.