Let $G$ be a finite group and $H$ a subgroup of index $p$, where $p$ is a prime. If $\operatorname{gcd}(|H|, p-1)=1$, then $H$ must be normal. Does somebody have a quick proof of this?

  • 7
    $\begingroup$ I've never seen this. The generalization I have seen is: If H is a subgroup of index p, where p is the smallest prime dividing |G|, then H is normal. planetmath.org/… $\endgroup$ – GeoffDS Apr 14 '11 at 22:44
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Numth: Then this would be a corollary of that, since if $p$ is the smallest prime dividing $|G|$, no smaller prime can divide $|H|$, and thus $\gcd(|h|,p-1)=1$. $\endgroup$ – joriki Apr 14 '11 at 22:48
  • $\begingroup$ @joriki I know. I just provided a partial answer. $\endgroup$ – GeoffDS Apr 14 '11 at 22:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ here's one generalization (not the one you want): if $[G:H]=p$ and $p$ is the minimal prime divisor of $G$ then $H$ is normal ( groupprops.subwiki.org/wiki/… ) $\endgroup$ – yoyo Apr 14 '11 at 22:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mesel, this a Theorem of Bioch and Van der Waall from the seventies, see also math.stackexchange.com/questions/1073736/… $\endgroup$ – Nicky Hekster Apr 17 '16 at 14:25

By induction on $|G|$, we can assume that there is no non-trivial normal subgroup $N$ of $G$ contained in $H$. Thus the action of $G$ on the conjugates of $H$ gives an embedding of $G$ into $S_p$, of order $p!$. Thus $|H|$ divides $(p-1)!$, and so $p$ does not divide $|H|$. Thus the Sylow p-groups of $G$ are cyclic of order $p$.

Now if any $h\in H$ normalized a Sylow p-group $P$, then $h$ would map into $Aut(P)\cong C_{p-1}$, and by hypothesis the image would be trivial. That is, any $h\in H$ normalizing $P$ also centralizes $P$. It follows that $N_G(P)=C_G(P)$, and by the Burnside Transfer theorem, $G$ has a normal subgroup $M$ of index $p$. Of course, any Sylow q-group of $H$ is then contained in $M$, and so $H$ is contained in $M$; that is, $H=M$ is normal.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Should probably mention there is a slightly faster way to do this, using Frobenius's theorem on normal p-complements; basically, since we can assume $|G|=pm$ where $(m,p-1)=1$, we get a normal p-complement $M$ in $G$ (see for example Corollary 9.22 in Isaacs's Algebra), and then we show $H=M$ just as I did in the end. $\endgroup$ – user641 Apr 15 '11 at 0:12
  • $\begingroup$ Another short proof: Suppose note, and let $H_1,\ldots,H_p$ be the conjugates of $H$; then $G$ acts on these as a transitive group of degree $p$, and since by hypothesis $G$ doesn't live in $AGL(1,p)$, $G$ must be 2-transitive; that is, $(p-1)$ divides the order of $G_1=H_1$, contradiction. This proof shows something stronger: if $H$ is not normal, then either $|H|$ divides $(p-1)$ or vice versa. $\endgroup$ – user641 Apr 15 '11 at 23:59
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, in my "stronger" statement above, I was thinking of the core-free case. $\endgroup$ – user641 Apr 16 '11 at 0:11
  • $\begingroup$ It might help to put the extra line $N_G(P) = PN_H(P)$ in your proof. $\endgroup$ – Geoff Robinson Jul 10 '11 at 9:41

Note: As pointed out in the comments this answer is missing a crucial detail, and unfortunately I have no idea if it can be salvaged.

This is a slightly more elementary way to show this:

Assume $H$ is not normal. Then clearly $N_G(H) = H$ and $G$ acts on the $|G:H| = p$ conjugates of $H$ by conjugation. The stabilizer of $H$ under this action is just $H$, which then acts on the other $p-1$ conjugates.

The orbit of a $gHg^{-1}$ under this action consists of all $g'Hg'^{-1}$ with $g'\in Hg$ and thus all the orbits have the same size. On the other hand, their sizes all divide the order of $H$, which is a contradiction since $gcd(|H|,p-1) = 1$

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Why do all orbits have the same size? That is, why does $ | H^g\cap H | = | H^{g^2}\cap H | $? $\endgroup$ – user641 Apr 15 '11 at 23:23
  • $\begingroup$ Tobias, I agree with Steve D. your proof is false. Aren't you mixing up the action of G on the conjugates of H and the action of H on these conjugates? $\endgroup$ – Nicky Hekster Apr 22 '11 at 8:03

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.