${prod_{i=1}^{r} H_{i}} bigcap H_{r+1} = {e} Rightarrow H_{i}bigcap H_{j} = {e} ; forall ineq j$?
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I am studying Internal Direct Products in Group Theory.
$mbox{Let}$ $G$ be a group and $H_{i}lhd G; forall i=1,2ldots
> n$
Suppose ${prod_{i=1}^{r} H_{i}} bigcap H_{r+1} = {e} ; forall
> r=1,2ldots (n-1)$ then prove that $H_{i}bigcap H_{j} = {e} ;
forall ineq j$
But converse is true only if $n=2$
First of all, I am really not sure about the validity of these statements since I am reading from a not-so-standard material.
I tried to prove $(Rightarrow)$ like this$:$
Let $ain H_{i}bigcap H_{j},; ; aneq e, ; ; f.s. ; ineq j$
$Rightarrow ain H_{i}$ and $a in H_{j}$
WLOG, assume $i < j $
Clearly, $a in prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i}$ since we can write $a=e.eldots a.e.dots e$
$Rightarrow {prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i} } bigcap H_{j} neq {e} ; ; mbox{contradiction}$
Converse is obviously true for $n=2$ but how can I show it is not true for $n>2$?
group-theory direct-product
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I am studying Internal Direct Products in Group Theory.
$mbox{Let}$ $G$ be a group and $H_{i}lhd G; forall i=1,2ldots
> n$
Suppose ${prod_{i=1}^{r} H_{i}} bigcap H_{r+1} = {e} ; forall
> r=1,2ldots (n-1)$ then prove that $H_{i}bigcap H_{j} = {e} ;
forall ineq j$
But converse is true only if $n=2$
First of all, I am really not sure about the validity of these statements since I am reading from a not-so-standard material.
I tried to prove $(Rightarrow)$ like this$:$
Let $ain H_{i}bigcap H_{j},; ; aneq e, ; ; f.s. ; ineq j$
$Rightarrow ain H_{i}$ and $a in H_{j}$
WLOG, assume $i < j $
Clearly, $a in prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i}$ since we can write $a=e.eldots a.e.dots e$
$Rightarrow {prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i} } bigcap H_{j} neq {e} ; ; mbox{contradiction}$
Converse is obviously true for $n=2$ but how can I show it is not true for $n>2$?
group-theory direct-product
Have you tried to prove this theorem... solo? :)
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 6:08
@MonstrousMoonshiner I've proved one side of it in the description itself
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:10
Yes, I was just making a silly joke...
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 7:11
@MonstrousMoonshiner ohh, my bad :p
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:11
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I am studying Internal Direct Products in Group Theory.
$mbox{Let}$ $G$ be a group and $H_{i}lhd G; forall i=1,2ldots
> n$
Suppose ${prod_{i=1}^{r} H_{i}} bigcap H_{r+1} = {e} ; forall
> r=1,2ldots (n-1)$ then prove that $H_{i}bigcap H_{j} = {e} ;
forall ineq j$
But converse is true only if $n=2$
First of all, I am really not sure about the validity of these statements since I am reading from a not-so-standard material.
I tried to prove $(Rightarrow)$ like this$:$
Let $ain H_{i}bigcap H_{j},; ; aneq e, ; ; f.s. ; ineq j$
$Rightarrow ain H_{i}$ and $a in H_{j}$
WLOG, assume $i < j $
Clearly, $a in prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i}$ since we can write $a=e.eldots a.e.dots e$
$Rightarrow {prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i} } bigcap H_{j} neq {e} ; ; mbox{contradiction}$
Converse is obviously true for $n=2$ but how can I show it is not true for $n>2$?
group-theory direct-product
I am studying Internal Direct Products in Group Theory.
$mbox{Let}$ $G$ be a group and $H_{i}lhd G; forall i=1,2ldots
> n$
Suppose ${prod_{i=1}^{r} H_{i}} bigcap H_{r+1} = {e} ; forall
> r=1,2ldots (n-1)$ then prove that $H_{i}bigcap H_{j} = {e} ;
forall ineq j$
But converse is true only if $n=2$
First of all, I am really not sure about the validity of these statements since I am reading from a not-so-standard material.
I tried to prove $(Rightarrow)$ like this$:$
Let $ain H_{i}bigcap H_{j},; ; aneq e, ; ; f.s. ; ineq j$
$Rightarrow ain H_{i}$ and $a in H_{j}$
WLOG, assume $i < j $
Clearly, $a in prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i}$ since we can write $a=e.eldots a.e.dots e$
$Rightarrow {prod_{i=1}^{j-1}H_{i} } bigcap H_{j} neq {e} ; ; mbox{contradiction}$
Converse is obviously true for $n=2$ but how can I show it is not true for $n>2$?
group-theory direct-product
group-theory direct-product
asked Nov 21 at 4:30
So Lo
62218
62218
Have you tried to prove this theorem... solo? :)
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 6:08
@MonstrousMoonshiner I've proved one side of it in the description itself
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:10
Yes, I was just making a silly joke...
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 7:11
@MonstrousMoonshiner ohh, my bad :p
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:11
add a comment |
Have you tried to prove this theorem... solo? :)
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 6:08
@MonstrousMoonshiner I've proved one side of it in the description itself
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:10
Yes, I was just making a silly joke...
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 7:11
@MonstrousMoonshiner ohh, my bad :p
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:11
Have you tried to prove this theorem... solo? :)
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 6:08
Have you tried to prove this theorem... solo? :)
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 6:08
@MonstrousMoonshiner I've proved one side of it in the description itself
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:10
@MonstrousMoonshiner I've proved one side of it in the description itself
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:10
Yes, I was just making a silly joke...
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 7:11
Yes, I was just making a silly joke...
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 7:11
@MonstrousMoonshiner ohh, my bad :p
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:11
@MonstrousMoonshiner ohh, my bad :p
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:11
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Counter example :
Group $Z_3times Z_3$ under +
$N_1=${$(0,0),(1,0),(2,0)$}
$N_2=${$(0,0)(0,1)(0,2)$}
$N_3=${$(0,0)(1,1)(2,2)$}
$N_1N_2cap N_3=${$(0,0),(1,1)(2,2)$}
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Counter example :
Group $Z_3times Z_3$ under +
$N_1=${$(0,0),(1,0),(2,0)$}
$N_2=${$(0,0)(0,1)(0,2)$}
$N_3=${$(0,0)(1,1)(2,2)$}
$N_1N_2cap N_3=${$(0,0),(1,1)(2,2)$}
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Counter example :
Group $Z_3times Z_3$ under +
$N_1=${$(0,0),(1,0),(2,0)$}
$N_2=${$(0,0)(0,1)(0,2)$}
$N_3=${$(0,0)(1,1)(2,2)$}
$N_1N_2cap N_3=${$(0,0),(1,1)(2,2)$}
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Counter example :
Group $Z_3times Z_3$ under +
$N_1=${$(0,0),(1,0),(2,0)$}
$N_2=${$(0,0)(0,1)(0,2)$}
$N_3=${$(0,0)(1,1)(2,2)$}
$N_1N_2cap N_3=${$(0,0),(1,1)(2,2)$}
Counter example :
Group $Z_3times Z_3$ under +
$N_1=${$(0,0),(1,0),(2,0)$}
$N_2=${$(0,0)(0,1)(0,2)$}
$N_3=${$(0,0)(1,1)(2,2)$}
$N_1N_2cap N_3=${$(0,0),(1,1)(2,2)$}
edited Nov 21 at 5:56
answered Nov 21 at 5:28
Shubham
1,3711518
1,3711518
add a comment |
add a comment |
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%2f3007262%2fprod-i-1r-h-i-bigcap-h-r1-e-rightarrow-h-i-bigcap-h-j%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
Have you tried to prove this theorem... solo? :)
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 6:08
@MonstrousMoonshiner I've proved one side of it in the description itself
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:10
Yes, I was just making a silly joke...
– Monstrous Moonshiner
Nov 21 at 7:11
@MonstrousMoonshiner ohh, my bad :p
– So Lo
Nov 21 at 7:11