So I came upon this exercise: Let $G$ be finite. If every proper subgroup $H$ of $G$ has the property $H < N_G(H)$, then $G$ is nilpotent.

I can prove the converse by induction on the nilpotency class of $G$, but I'm kind of stuck here.


It suffices to show that every Sylow $p$-subgroup $P$ of $G$ is normal. But $N_G(P) = N_G(N_G(P))$, so your hypothesis implies $N_G(P) = G$.

  • $\begingroup$ How do you get to the conclusion that $N_G(P) = G$? If $P$ is properly contained in $G$, then by my hypothesis, $P$ is properly contained in $N_G(P)$, so the order of $N_G(P)$ is not divisible by p. How does that imply $N_G(P) = G$? $\endgroup$ – Sid Caroline Jun 11 '17 at 6:57
  • $\begingroup$ Let $H = N_G(P)$. $\endgroup$ – D_S Jun 11 '17 at 13:46

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.