edited by
3,087 views
9 votes
9 votes

Let $G$ be a finite group and $H$ be a subgroup of $G$. For $a \in G$, define $aH=\left\{ah \mid h \in H\right\}$.

  1. Show that $|aH| = |bH|.$

  2. Show that for every pair of elements $a, b \in G$, either $aH = bH$ or $aH$ and $bH$ are disjoint.

  3. Use the above to argue that the order of $H$ must divide the order of $G.$

edited by

1 Answer

Best answer
8 votes
8 votes

Given :

$\langle G,\star\rangle$ is a finite group and $H$ is a finite subgroup of $G$. For $a \in G$, define $aH = \{ah\mid h \in H\}$

i.e. $aH$ is a left coset.


a.

The order of a coset is defined as its cardinality.

any $2$ sets have the same cardinality if and only if there is a bijection between them.

So to show any two left cosets have the same cardinality, it suffices to demonstrate a bijection between them.

Let $aH$ and $bH$ are $2$ left cosets of $H$ in $G$ such that

$aH = \{ah\mid h \in H\}$ and $bH = \{bh\mid h \in H\}$ where $a,b \in G$

Let $f$ be a mapping defined from $aH$ to $bH$ such that

$f(ah) = bh\ \forall\ h \in H$

Let $ah_1 =ah_2$ where $h_1,h_2 \in H$

  • $\implies a^{-1}ah_1 =a^{-1}ah_2$
  • $\implies h_1 =h_2$
  • $\implies bh_1 =bh_2$
  • $\implies f(ah_1) =f(ah_2)$

$\therefore$ $f$ is well defined.

Let $f(ah_1) =f(ah_2)$ where $h_1,h_2 \in H$

  • $\implies bh_1 =bh_2$
  • $\implies b^{-1}bh_1 =b^{-1}bh_2$
  • $\implies h_1 =h_2$
  • $\implies ah_1 =ah_2$

$\therefore$ $f$ is one-one mapping.

Let $y \in bH$ then $y=bh$ where $h \in H$

$\exists ah \in aH$ such that

$f(ah) =hb =y$

  • $\implies y$ has a pre-image in $aH$
  • $\implies $ Every element of $bH$ has a pre-image in $aH$

$\therefore$ $f$ is an onto mapping.

$\because\ f$ is a well-defined one-one and onto mapping

$\implies f$ is a bijective function

$\implies $  the Cosets $aH$ and $bH$ have the same cardinality.

$\therefore\ |aH| = |bH|$


b.

For $aH$ and $bH$

Case 1.   $aH$ and $bH$ are disjoint i.e. they have no elements in common. i.e. $(aH \cap bH)=\phi$

Case 2. . $aH=bH$ i.e. all the elements of $aH$ and $bH$ are common(they are identical) i.e. $(aH \cap bH)=(aH \cup bH)$

Case 3. $aH$ and $bH$ have only some common elements and other elements are not common.

i.e We can have (either Case 1. or Case 2. ) and Case 3. should also be satisfied. If Case 1 and Case 2 are TRUE it means Case 3 is false and vice versa. We will now prove that Case 1 and 2 are indeed TRUE.

Let $aH$ and $bH$ be two left cosets of $H$ in $G$ where $a,b \in G$

If we get $aH \cap bH =  \phi$

then Case 1. is satisfied. ($\because$ we assumed it )

Now let us check for Case 2.

Let $aH \cap bH \neq  \phi$ where $a,b \in G$

$\implies$  At least one element of $aH$ must be equal to an element of $bH$

Let $\alpha$ be one such common element

$\implies$ $\alpha \in aH \cap bH$ such that $\alpha =ah_1=bh_2$ for some $h_1,h_2 \in H$. 

$\implies$ $ah_1 = bh_2$

$\implies$ $ah_1h_{1}^{-1} = bh_2h_{1}^{-1}$

$\implies a = b h_2 h_{1}^{-1}$

$\implies a = b h_2 h_{1}^{-1}  \in bH$ ($\because$ $h_1,h_2 \in H \implies h_{1}^{-1},h_2  \in H \implies h_{1}^{−1}h_2 \in H$ by closure property)

$\therefore$ $a \in bH$

So $ a = bh_3$ (where $h_3 = h_2 h_{1}^{-1} \in H$)

$\implies aH = bh_3H$

$\implies aH = bH$ ($\because kH = H$ if $k \in H$)

So, for every pair of elements $a,b \in G$, $aH$ and $bH$ are either disjoint else if they are not disjoint then they will have all the element same.


c.

From $a.$ and $b.$ we can see that

The cosets partition the entire group $G$ into mutually disjoint subsets i.e.

$G = a_1H \cup a_2H \cup \ldots a_kH $ ($\because$ $2$ left cosets are either identical or disjoint)

$\implies o(G) = o( a_1H) + o(a_2H) + \ldots + o(a_kH) $

$\implies o(G) = o(H)+ o(H) + \ldots+ k\times $ ($\because o(aH)=o(bH) = o(H)$)

$\implies o(G) = k*o(H)$

$\therefore$ the order of $H$ must divide the order of $G$.

This is also known as Lagrange's Theorem.


NOTE :-

$$kH = H\text{ if }k \in H$$Proof : -

Suppose $k \in H$ and $x \in kH$

$\therefore x = kh$ where $h \in H$

$\implies  xh^{-1} = k $

$\because k \in H \implies xh^{-1} \in H\implies x \in H $(closure property)$\implies kH \subseteq H  \quad \to I$

Let $ x \in H$ then

$x = ex = k k^{-1} x = k(k^{-1} x) \in kH$ ($\because$ $k,x \in H \implies k^{-1},x \in H \implies k^{−1}x \in H$ by closure property)

$\implies H \subseteq kH\quad \to II$

Combining $I$ and $II$ we get $H = kH$

edited by

Related questions

13 votes
13 votes
3 answers
1
Kathleen asked Sep 23, 2014
2,349 views
Show that the formula $\left[(\sim p \vee q) \Rightarrow (q \Rightarrow p)\right]$ is not a tautology.Let $A$ be a tautology and $B$ any other formula. Prove that $(A \ve...
27 votes
27 votes
5 answers
4
Kathleen asked Oct 8, 2014
6,465 views
Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ be subgroups of a group $G$.Show that $G_1 \cap G_2$ is also a subgroup of $G$.Is $G_1 \cup G_2$ always a subgroup of $G$?.