The cases in proving that a group of order 90 is not simple
I am trying to attempt this problem, but I am wondering why exactly these are the two cases the problem is split into. I can understand the first case, since that lets us count elements and get a contradiction, but why is the second case there? In other words, why do these two cases exhaust all possibilities?
abstract-algebra group-theory sylow-theory simple-groups
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
add a comment |
I am trying to attempt this problem, but I am wondering why exactly these are the two cases the problem is split into. I can understand the first case, since that lets us count elements and get a contradiction, but why is the second case there? In other words, why do these two cases exhaust all possibilities?
abstract-algebra group-theory sylow-theory simple-groups
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
Slightly different context, but essentially a duplicate of math.stackexchange.com/questions/2536201/…
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 8 at 23:00
2
Of course they are exhaustive: (b) is the negation of (a). If two different subgroups of order 9 do not intersect trivially, then they necessarily intersect in a 3-element subgroup, as a proper nontrivial subgroup in a 9-element group must have 3 elements by the Lagrange theorem.
– A. Pongrácz
Dec 8 at 23:04
add a comment |
I am trying to attempt this problem, but I am wondering why exactly these are the two cases the problem is split into. I can understand the first case, since that lets us count elements and get a contradiction, but why is the second case there? In other words, why do these two cases exhaust all possibilities?
abstract-algebra group-theory sylow-theory simple-groups
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
I am trying to attempt this problem, but I am wondering why exactly these are the two cases the problem is split into. I can understand the first case, since that lets us count elements and get a contradiction, but why is the second case there? In other words, why do these two cases exhaust all possibilities?
abstract-algebra group-theory sylow-theory simple-groups
abstract-algebra group-theory sylow-theory simple-groups
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
asked Dec 8 at 22:57
Wesley
520313
520313
Slightly different context, but essentially a duplicate of math.stackexchange.com/questions/2536201/…
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 8 at 23:00
2
Of course they are exhaustive: (b) is the negation of (a). If two different subgroups of order 9 do not intersect trivially, then they necessarily intersect in a 3-element subgroup, as a proper nontrivial subgroup in a 9-element group must have 3 elements by the Lagrange theorem.
– A. Pongrácz
Dec 8 at 23:04
add a comment |
Slightly different context, but essentially a duplicate of math.stackexchange.com/questions/2536201/…
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 8 at 23:00
2
Of course they are exhaustive: (b) is the negation of (a). If two different subgroups of order 9 do not intersect trivially, then they necessarily intersect in a 3-element subgroup, as a proper nontrivial subgroup in a 9-element group must have 3 elements by the Lagrange theorem.
– A. Pongrácz
Dec 8 at 23:04
Slightly different context, but essentially a duplicate of math.stackexchange.com/questions/2536201/…
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 8 at 23:00
Slightly different context, but essentially a duplicate of math.stackexchange.com/questions/2536201/…
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 8 at 23:00
2
2
Of course they are exhaustive: (b) is the negation of (a). If two different subgroups of order 9 do not intersect trivially, then they necessarily intersect in a 3-element subgroup, as a proper nontrivial subgroup in a 9-element group must have 3 elements by the Lagrange theorem.
– A. Pongrácz
Dec 8 at 23:04
Of course they are exhaustive: (b) is the negation of (a). If two different subgroups of order 9 do not intersect trivially, then they necessarily intersect in a 3-element subgroup, as a proper nontrivial subgroup in a 9-element group must have 3 elements by the Lagrange theorem.
– A. Pongrácz
Dec 8 at 23:04
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3031767%2fthe-cases-in-proving-that-a-group-of-order-90-is-not-simple%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3031767%2fthe-cases-in-proving-that-a-group-of-order-90-is-not-simple%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Slightly different context, but essentially a duplicate of math.stackexchange.com/questions/2536201/…
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 8 at 23:00
2
Of course they are exhaustive: (b) is the negation of (a). If two different subgroups of order 9 do not intersect trivially, then they necessarily intersect in a 3-element subgroup, as a proper nontrivial subgroup in a 9-element group must have 3 elements by the Lagrange theorem.
– A. Pongrácz
Dec 8 at 23:04