I'm struggling to proof that if $H$ and $K$ are subgroups of finite index of a group $G$ such that $[G:H]$ and $[G:K]$ are relatively prime, then $G=HK$. I don't know why I can't answer it, because this question seems easy. I'm stuck maybe because I've studied so far just Lagrange's theorem and some of its consequences. But I think we don't need much more, because this is the material covered so far by the Hungerford's book.

I need help.


  • $\begingroup$ @CamiloArosemena no, maybe it's my problem, I found the proposition 4.8 and 4.9 very unintuitive and a little bit out of context. $\endgroup$ – user42912 Apr 25 '13 at 23:10

We have the following fact:

  1. If $H$ and $K$ are subgroups of a group $G$, then $[H:H\cap K]\leq [G:K]$. If $[G:K]$ is finite, then $[H:H\cap K]=[G:K]$ if and only if $G=KH$. This is proposition $4.8$ of chapter I in Hungerford's Algebra.

It is easy to prove that $[G:H][H:H\cap K]=[G:K][K:H\cap K]$, from this conclude that $[G:H]\mid [K:H\cap K]$; since $[G:H]$ and $[G:K]$ are relatively prime, and combinig this with $(1)$ we get $[G:H]=[K:H\cap K]$, so...

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ But how to $G=KH$, you've only proved $G=KH$, remember $KH$ is not necessarily equal to $HK$, thank you for your answer :) $\endgroup$ – user42912 Apr 25 '13 at 23:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Interchange the roles of $H$ and $K$. You're welcome. $\endgroup$ – Camilo Arosemena-Serrato Apr 25 '13 at 23:46
  • $\begingroup$ I edited the question $\endgroup$ – Camilo Arosemena-Serrato Apr 25 '13 at 23:49
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you again, I'm writing down the solution, seeing if everything's all right :) $\endgroup$ – user42912 Apr 25 '13 at 23:53
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @user42912 In general it is not true that $HK = KH$. But it is true that if $H$ and $K$ are subgroups of $G$ then, $HK = KH$ if and only if $HK$ is a subgroup of G. So since CamiloArosemena has shown that $KH = G$ then in particular, $KH$ is a subgroup of $G$, so $KH = HK$ $\endgroup$ – user58514 Apr 25 '13 at 23:58

Try proving that [$G$ : $H\cap K$] $=$ [$G$ : $H$][$G$ : $K$].

And then see how you can use the fact that $|HK| = \frac{|H||K|}{|H\cap K|}$

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ $G$ was not supposed to be necessarily finite, and $HK$ is not necessarily a subgroup.. $\endgroup$ – Berci Apr 25 '13 at 23:14
  • $\begingroup$ @Berci Just wondering,how can HK not be a subgroup when the question wants us to prove that G =HK which means HK is itself a group? $\endgroup$ – user10024395 Nov 24 '14 at 12:25

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.