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.

Where does the following argument break down?

Let $G$ be a group, with $H \triangleleft G$, $K \leq G$ and $H \cap K = 1$. Taking the semidirect product, we have $G \cong H \rtimes K$. Identifying $K$ with $1 \times K$, we consider conjugation of $K$ with any element in $H \rtimes K$. Pick any element $(h, k)$, then $(h, k)^{-1} \cdot (1, K) \cdot (h, k) = (1, K)$ Therefore, we conclude that $K$ must be normal in $G$ as well. But this is clearly wrong.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

It is false that $(h, k)^{-1} \cdot (1, K) \cdot (h, k) = (1, K)$. Note that




so that

$$(h,k)(1,a)(h,k)^{-1}=(h,k)(1,a)(k^{-1}h^{-1}k,k^{-1})=(h,ka)(k^{-1}h^{-1}k,k^{-1})$$ $$=(h(ka)(k^{-1}h^{-1}k)(ka)^{-1},kak^{-1})=(h(kak^{-1})h^{-1}(kak^{-1})^{-1},kak^{-1})$$

and there is no reason the first entry of this must be $1$ (unless $a=1$, of course).

share|improve this answer

Recall that writing $G \simeq H \rtimes K$ means that $(h,k) \mapsto hk$ is a just bijection between $H \times K$ and $G$, but not necessarily a group morphism (in which case you would have a direct product).

In your case, you have

$(h,k_1)^{-1} . (1,k_2) . (h, k_1 ) = k_1^{-1} h^{-1} k_2 h k_1$

Which you can rewrite:

$(h,k_1)^{-1} . (1,k_2) . (h, k_1 ) = (h^{k_1})^{-1} k_2^{k_1} h^{k_1}$

And since $k_2^{k_1}$ is in $K$, you have

$ (h,k_1)^{-1} . (1,K) . (h, k_1 ) = (h^{k_1})^{-1} (1,K) h^{k_1}$

This means that conjugates of $(1,K)$ can always be written as conjugates by an element of $H$, but that's all you can say in general.

share|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.