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

(This is my first post here, so please excuse me if I'm not following proper etiquette.)

First, I noted that both $K$ and $S$ are subgroups, thus their intersection is a subgroup. We can write that $|G| = p^km$ and $|S| = p^k$ where $p$ is a prime and $m$ has no factors of $p$. By Lagrange's theorem, since the intersection is a subgroup of S, then the cardinality of the intersection must be of the form $p^l$ where $l \leq k$. We can write $K$ as $p^rn$ where $r \leq k$ and $n$ has no factors of $p$. If I can show that $l=r$, then it seems that would be enough to show that the intersection is a sylow p-subgroup of K, but I can't seem to get anywhere else with anything.

I recall a theorem that states that since K is normal, then the intersection of K and S is normal in S but I don't know if that helps me much. There is the corollary of Sylow's 3rd theorem in my book that states that "A Sylow p-subgroup of a finite group G is a normal subgroup of G if and only if it is the only Sylow p-subgroup of G" which seems like I could use that somehow, but I'm not too sure.

share|cite|improve this question
Let $M$ a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $K$. The Sylow theorems tell you something useful about $M$ and the Sylow $p$-subgroups of $G$. – Daniel Fischer Jan 16 '14 at 22:27
@DanielFischer I'm looking at the Sylow theorems and I don't see anything that tells me anything more about $M$ or the Sylow p-subgroups of $G$. I get that $M$ is conjugate to any other Sylow p-subgroup of $K$, don't know if that's useful. – benguin Jan 16 '14 at 23:01
It's a $p$-subgroup of $G$, so it is contained ine one of the conjugates of $S$, $M \subset gSg^{-1}$. Hence $g^{-1}Mg \subset S$. But also $g^{-1}Mg \subset K$ since $K$ is normal. – Daniel Fischer Jan 16 '14 at 23:05
How do we know that it's a p-subgroup of G? Suppose by example that $|G| = (2^3)(3), |K| = (2^2)(3), |M| = (2^2)$. $M$ is clearly a Sylow 2-subgroup of K but it is not a Sylow 2-subgroup of G. – benguin Jan 16 '14 at 23:21
It's in general not a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $G$. But its order is a power of $p$, so it's a $p$-subgroup of $G$. – Daniel Fischer Jan 16 '14 at 23:23

$K \cap S$ is a $p$-subgroup of $K$. Now $\frac{|KS|}{|S|} = \frac{|K|}{|K \cap S|}$, so $p \nmid [G : S] \implies p \nmid \frac{|KS|}{|S|} \implies p \nmid [K : K \cap S]$, i.e. $K \cap S$ is a Sylow-$p$ subgroup of $K$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Ok, I'm going to go through your proof to see if I understand. So I get what you say about the second isomorphism theorem, I agree with that. Also, if p does not divide ($K:K \cap S$) that says something important. ($K: K \cap S) = |K|/|K \cap S|$. So if $p$ does not divide $|K|/|K \cap S|$, that must imply that the intersection has cardinality that how the same power of $p$ as $K$, which implies it is a Sylow p-subgroup. What I'm still unsure about is how result from the 2nd isomorphism theorem implies that p does not divide $(K : K \cap S)$. – benguin Jan 16 '14 at 23:15
I've edited the answer - the previous application of the second isomorphism theorem was incorrect, since $S$ need not be normal in $G$. The new argument only uses facts about orders – zcn Jan 16 '14 at 23:32
Why use the first part to conclude that p does not divide the index of the Sylow-p subgroup in the group? p never divides the index of a sylow p-subgroup. – Andrew Jun 8 '15 at 19:26

Let $N$ be a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $K$. $N$ is a $p$-subgroup of $G$ such that $N \leq xSx^{-1}$ for some $ x\in G$. Then $N \leq xSx^{-1} \cap K=xSx^{-1} \cap xKx^{-1}$ since we have that $K$ is normal. Thus, $N \leq x(S \cap K)x^{-1}$, and consequently $x^{-1}Nx \leq (S \cap K)$. Now $x^{-1}Nx$ is a subgroup of $K$, and has maximal $p$-power order in $K$, since $x^{-1}Nx= \left|N\right|$. Since $S \cap N$ is a $p$-subgroup of $K$, $S \cap N$ is a maximal $p$-power subgroup of $K$, and hence a Sylow $p$-subgroup.

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.