In the Combinatorial Group Theor-Lyndon, Schup, the authors say (start with)

Informally, a group is free on a set of generators if no relation holds among these generators except trivial relations that hold among any set of elements in any group.

With this definition of Free group, I tried to see why the commutator subgroup of free group $F_2=\langle a,b\rangle$ on two generators is not finitely generated. The hint given was that the set $\{[a^i,b^j]\colon i,j\in\mathbb{Z}\}$ is a (free) generating set for $[F_2,F_2]$.

As an example, I tried to see why $[a^2,b]$ and $[a,b]$ are free? Informally, if they were not free, then they would a non-trivial relation between them, and hence between $a,b$.

But, I am not satisfied myself with this informal proof of $[a,b]$ and $[a^2,b]$ are free.

How can we prove precisely this last statement? Should we go back to the precise definition of free groups?


Let $x=[a^2,b]=a^{-2}b^{-1}ab$ and $y=[a,b]=a^{-1}b^{-1}ab$.

Conisder all words of the form $uvw$, where $u,v,w \in \{x,x^{-1},y,y^{-1}\}$, and $v\ne u^{-1}$, $v \ne w^{-1}$. You will find that there is no such product $uvw$ in which the whole of $v$ cancels.

So the reduction of an reduced word $u_1u_2\cdots u_k$ with $u_i \in \{x,x^{-1},y,y^{-1}\}$ has length at least $k$ and so cannot reduce to the identity. So the subgroup generated by $x$ and $y$ is free.

The Nielsen proof that a subgroup of a free group is free involves an algorithmic method for reducing a generating set of a subgroup to a free generating set, so you could apply that method to examples like this.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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