0
$\begingroup$

Let G be a finite group of order $p^{r}m$ where $p \in \mathbb{P}, r>0$ and $p$ does not divide $m$.

One of Sylow's theorem is this:

If $n$ is the number of Sylow p-subgroups then $n$ divides $m$ and $n \equiv 1 \pmod{p}$.

I made an observation and wonder if they are true.

Since p-group/ Sylow p-subgroups are contained in G, G contains at least one p-group/Sylow p-subgroup. In general, there are m p-group/Sylow p-subgroup. Is this correct?

Secondly, by the above theorem I have stated, how does the fact that n divides m denote the index of the p-group/ Sylow p-subgroup in G?

The index of a subgroup in a group G is the distinct number of the subgroup in G. This is given by the fact that the order of the subgroup divides the order of a group G.

Greatly appreciate if anyone would illuminate my doubts.

Thanks in advance.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It is not the case that in general $m$ is the number of Sylow $p$-subgroups. Alas, I cannot understand your remaining questions. $\endgroup$ – Lord Shark the Unknown Jul 13 '17 at 6:46
  • $\begingroup$ However, $m$ is indeed always the index of a $p$-Sylow subgroup of $G$. This is simply because a $p$-Sylow subgroup has order $p^r$ by definition. $\endgroup$ – Sebastian Schoennenbeck Jul 13 '17 at 7:58
2
$\begingroup$

As to your first question, as noted in a comment, consider for instance $S_{3}$, and take $p = 3$, so $m = 2$, but $n = 1$.

As to

The index of a subgroup in a group $G$ is the distinct number of the subgroup in $G$.

you probably mean

The index of a subgroup $H$ in a group $G$ is the number of distinct left, say, cosets of the subgroup $H$ in $G$.

Note that this number is denoted by $\lvert G : H \rvert$, and it is called the index of $H$ in $G$.

The reason $n \mid m$ (which appears to be what you are asking) is that $n = \lvert G : N_{G}(P) \rvert$, where $P$ is a Sylow $p$-subgroup, and $N_{G}(P)$ is its normalizer in $G$. Now since $P \le N_{G}(P)$ we have by Lagrange $$ m = \lvert G : P \rvert = \lvert G : N_{G}(P) \rvert \cdot \lvert N_{G}(P) : P \rvert = n \cdot \lvert N_{G}(P) : P \rvert, $$ so that $n \mid m$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much. Something for me to digest. $\endgroup$ – Mathematicing Jul 13 '17 at 8:15

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.