Let $G$ and $G'$ be groups. Let $\phi: G \to G'$ be an isomorphism. Is it true that $\phi(Z(G))= Z(\phi(G))$.

Let $x \in Z(G)$. Then for any $g\in G$ we have $\phi(x)\phi(g) = \phi(xg) = \phi(gx) = \phi(g)\phi(x)$. Hence $\phi(Z(G)) \subseteq Z(\phi(G))$

Let $x \in Z(\phi(G))$. Then $x = \phi(a)$ for some $a\in G$. For any $\phi(g) \in \phi(G)$, we have $\phi(a)\phi(g) = \phi(g)\phi(a)$. Thus $\phi(ag) = \phi(ga)$. As $\phi$ is injective $ag =ga$. Hence $a \in Z(G)$. Thus $x = \phi(a) \in \phi(Z(G))$.

Is this proof correct? I'm not sure about the second inclusion

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Why not apply your first argument to the inverse map $\phi^{-1}$? $\endgroup$ – Lord Shark the Unknown Jun 9 '17 at 5:59
  • $\begingroup$ @LordSharktheUnknown I think that is a very good way to prove the statement, but I think that it is instructive (besides what the OP wants) to see how to make this style of proof work. $\endgroup$ – Alex Ortiz Jun 9 '17 at 6:12

I think this preserves the style of proof you are going for and clears things up:

Let $x\in Z(G')$. Note that $x = \phi(a)$ for some $a\in G$. We claim that $a$ is an element of the center of $G$. To that end, let $b\in G$ be arbitrary. Then $\phi(b)\in G'$ so $\phi(ab) = \phi(a)\phi(b) = \phi(b)\phi(a) = \phi(ba)$ by our hypothesis on $x = \phi(a)$. Now $\phi$ is an injection, so $ab = ba$. Since $b$ was arbitrary, $a\in Z(G)$, as desired.


Yes. Centres of isomorphic groups are isomorphic.

Intuitively this is because if an element in $G$ commutes with every other element then its image under an isomorphism commutes with everything in the image of $G,$ and similarly if we start with an element in the image of $G,$ then we apply the same argument again (but swap the isomorphism for its inverse - doesn't matter, it's essentially the same isomorphism).

It is quite easy to translate from plain language into a formal proof.

Forgot that you asked two questions:

You already showed that $\phi(Z(G))\subset Z(\phi(G)).$ Now you can swap the groups around and repeat the same argument with $G\leftrightarrow\phi(G)$ and $\phi\leftrightarrow\phi^{-1}.$ Your argument makes the same statement in principle anyway, and shows that $Z(\phi(G))\subset\phi(Z(G)).$ Then you can say $\phi$ is an isomorphism so $Z(\phi(G))\cong\phi(Z(G)).$


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.