Let $A$ be an Abelian group of prime power order. It can be expressed as a (unique) direct product of cyclic groups of prime power order:

$A = \mathbb{Z}_{p^{n_1}} \times \cdots \times \mathbb{Z}_{p^{n_t}}$

where $p$ is a prime, and $n_1, \ldots, n_t $ are positive integers.

Let $B$ be a subgroup of $A$.

Question Is it always the case that:

$B \cong \mathbb{Z}_{p^{m_1}} \times \cdots \times \mathbb{Z}_{p^{m_t}} \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $ [Equation 1]

where $m_i \le n_i$ for $i=1, \ldots, t$ ?

Can anyone provide a counterexample, a proof, or a reference to a proof? It looks 'obviously' true, but I've spent days trying to construct a proof (based on the orders of the elements), but to no avail.

Note Equation 1 contains an isomorphism sign, not an equals sign. So, for example, $A = \mathbb{Z}_2 \times \mathbb{Z}_2$ and $B=\{ (0,0), (1,1) \}$ is not a counterexample, because $B \cong \mathbb{Z}_2 \times \{0\}$, and so we could take $n_1 = n_2 = m_1 = 2$ and $m_2 = 0$.

  • $\begingroup$ As noted by Michael Pounds, this question is exactly the first part of my question math.stackexchange.com/questions/528404, which additionally asks for quotient groups of finite abelian $p$-groups. $\endgroup$ – azimut Apr 9 '14 at 14:18

I belive this is true: we can assume $n_1 \ge n_2 \ge \cdots \ge n_t$ ad $m_1 \ge m_2 \ge \cdots \ge m_t$. Assume that $m_j \le n_j$ for $j=1, \cdots, r$ but $m_{r+1}>n_{r+1}$. Let $G^k$ donote that $\{ g^{p^k}|g \in G\}$, just for the simplicity of symbols. Let $l=m_{r+1}-1$. Since $B \le A$, then $B^l \le A^l$. But $A^l=(Z_{p^{n_1}})^l \times \cdots \times (Z_{p^{n_r}})^l$ and $B^l=(Z_{p^{m_1}})^l \times \cdots \times (Z_{p^{m_{r+1}}})^l \times \cdots$. Now $B^l$ has more elements of order $p$ than that of $A^l$. So we get a contradiction.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. How to prove that $A^l$ and $B^l$ are groups? $\endgroup$ – Michael Pounds Apr 8 '14 at 15:13
  • $\begingroup$ This is abelian group. So it is groups. $\endgroup$ – Wei Zhou Apr 8 '14 at 16:09
  • $\begingroup$ I understand that $A$ and $B$ are groups. But it is not obvious to me that $A^l = \{ a^{p^k} | a \in A \} $ is a group. $\endgroup$ – Michael Pounds Apr 8 '14 at 16:20
  • $\begingroup$ I have found a reference which justifies that $A^l$ is a group. (I am still an undergraduate, so sorry for being slow...) P. Hall, A contribution to the theory of groups of prime-power order, Proc. London Math. Soc. (2) 36 (1933), 29–95. $\endgroup$ – Michael Pounds Apr 9 '14 at 2:48
  • $\begingroup$ Just to clarify - are there some missing symbols in your expressions for $A^l$ and $B^l$? I have highlighted what I think might be missing symbols : $A^l=(Z_{p^{n_1}})^l \times \cdots \fbox{$\times$} (Z_{p^{n_r}})^l$ and $B^l=(Z_{p^{m_1}})^l \times \fbox{$\cdots \times$} (Z_{p^{m_{r+1}}})^l \fbox{$\times$} \cdots$. Am I correct? I just want to make sure I understand. Thanks! $\endgroup$ – Michael Pounds Apr 9 '14 at 3:02

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.