If $G$ is a finite group having a $p$-complement for every prime $p$, then $G$ is solvable.

Below shows part of the proof:

Assume that $G$ is simple. Let $|G|=p_1^{e_1}\dots p_n^{e_n}$, where the $p_i$ are distinct primes and $e_i>0$ for all $i$. For each $i$, let $H_i$be a Hall $p_i'$-subgroup of $G$, so that $[G:H_i]=p_i^{e_i}$ and thus $|H_i|=\prod_{j\neq i}p_j^{e_j}$. If $D=H_3\cap\dots \cap H_n$, then $[G:D]=\prod_{i=3}^np_i^{e_i},$ and so $|D|=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}$. Now $D$ is a solvable group, by Burnside's Theorem. If $N$ is a minimal normal subgroup of $D$, then $N$ is elementary abelian; for notation, assume that $N$ is a $p_1$-group. $[G:D\cap H_2]=\prod_{i=2}^np_2^{e_i}$, so that $|D\cap H_2|=p_1^{e_1}$ and $D\cap H_2$ is a Sylow $p_1$-subgroup of $D$. $N\leq D\cap H_2$ and so $N\leq H_2$. But, as above, $|D\cap H_1|=p_2^{e_2}$, and comparison of orders gives $G=H_2(D\cap H_1)$.

I can't understand the highlighted statement. By the product formula, I am able to prove that $|G|=|H_2(D\cap H_1)|$, but I have no way to prove that $H_2(D\cap H_1)\leq G$, also I can't get the information that $H_2$ or $D\cap H_1$ is normal subgroup of $G$. Is this key hidden in some previous statement?


Now take a subset $S$ of $G$ with $|S|=|G|$. Do you really need $S\leq G$ in order to get $S=G$?


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.