I want to show that if $N$ is normal in $G$ then $G$ is solvable implies $G/N$ is solvable.

Now, $G$ is solvable implies there exists a chain
$\{e\}=G_0 \trianglelefteq G_1 \trianglelefteq G_2 \trianglelefteq G_3 \cdots \trianglelefteq G_s=G $, such that $G_i\trianglelefteq G_{i+1}$ and $G_{i+1}/G_i$ is abelian.

We can consider the chain $\overline{N} =G_0N/N \trianglelefteq G_1N/N \trianglelefteq G_2/N \trianglelefteq G_3N/N \cdots \trianglelefteq G_sN/N=G/N $ I want to show that

1. $G_iN/N \trianglelefteq G_{i+1}N/N $ which is equivalent to showing $G_iN\trianglelefteq G_{i+1}N$

2. and $\frac{G_{i+1}N/N} { G_{i}N/N }$ which is isomorphic to $\frac{G_{i+1}N}{G_iN}$ is abelian.

With a lot of brut force somehow I can prove the first part. But I am unable to prove the second part. Can someone suggest me an elegant proof of (1) and any proof of (2)?

I am including a proof of (1) which I have done Proof of (1)

  1. follows immediately from the third isomorphism theorem. Consider the map $\phi: G_{i+1}N/N \to G_{i+1}N/G_iN$. It is easy to check that this is a homomorphism with kernel $G_iN/N$.

Having obtained $\frac{G_{i+1}N/N}{G_iN/N} \simeq G_{i+1}N/G_iN$ we need to show that the right-hand side is an abelian group. Elaborating on the same argument used here Quotients of Solvable Groups are Solvable:

consider the commutators $[xn, ym]$ for $x, y \in G_{i+1}$, $n,m \in N$. We want $[xn,ym] \in G_iN$, given that $[x,y] \in G_i$. Now, $[xn,ym]G_iN = ([xn,ym]N)G_i$, so it suffices to show that $[xn,ym]N = [x,y]N$. This is again brute force

$xnymn^{-1}x^{-1}m^{-1}y^{-1}N = xyx^{-1}y^{-1}N$

$\iff nymn^{-1}x^{-1}mN = yx^{-1}N$

$\iff (y^{-1}ny)(mn^{-1})(x^{-1}mx)N = N$, and this is true because $N$ is normal.

  • $\begingroup$ Why is $G_i$ normal in $G_{i+1}N$? $\endgroup$ – Babai Mar 10 at 21:15
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry! I made a mistake and I removed it. I will have to think of another proof - the only ones I know of use brute force. $\endgroup$ – vxnture Mar 10 at 21:34
  • $\begingroup$ I can already show the isomorphism you have just shown above. What I am struggling to show is enough of those isomorphic quotients are abelian. $\endgroup$ – Babai Mar 10 at 21:54
  • $\begingroup$ math.stackexchange.com/questions/1339609/… there is a proof here (with commutators) $\endgroup$ – vxnture Mar 10 at 21:59
  • $\begingroup$ There is a gap in that proof too, I am not able to verify it $\endgroup$ – Babai Mar 11 at 5:24

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.