3

Let $p$ be a prime number.

Let $G$ be a group with more than one Sylow $p$-subgroup

Over all pairs of distinct Sylow $p$-subgroups, let $P$ and $Q$ be chosen so that $|P \cap Q|$ is maximal.

I want to prove that $N_G(P\cap Q)$ has more than one Sylow $p$-subgroup and that any two distinct Sylow $p$-subgroups of $N_G(P\cap Q)$ intersect in the Subgroup $P\cap Q$.

Could you help me?

Nicky Hekster
  • 49,281
Seongqjini
  • 1,431

1 Answers1

5

We can assume $P \neq Q$, whence $P \cap Q \subsetneq P$. Then by the normalizer grow principle, we have $P \cap Q \subsetneq N_P(P \cap Q)$. Let $R$ be a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $N_G(P \cap Q)$ containing its $p$-subgroup $N_P(P \cap Q)$. Now $R \subseteq U$ for some $U\in Syl_p(G)$. Assume that $U \neq P$. Hence, $P \cap Q \subsetneq N_P(P \cap Q) \subseteq R \subseteq U$. But also $N_P(P \cap Q) \subseteq P$, so $P \cap Q \subsetneq N_P(P \cap Q) \subseteq P \cap U$, violating the maximality of $|P \cap Q|$. Hence $U =P$. We conclude that $R=P \cap N_G(P \cap Q)=N_P(P \cap Q)$. Similarly, we see that $S=Q \cap N_G(P \cap Q)=N_Q(P \cap Q)$ is a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $N_G(P \cap Q)$. Now if $R = S$, then $P \cap Q \subsetneq N_P(P \cap Q) \subseteq P \cap Q$, which is absurd. Finally, $R \cap S = P \cap N_G(P \cap Q) \cap Q=N_{P \cap Q}(P \cap Q)=P \cap Q$.

Since $P \cap Q$ is normal in $N_G(P \cap Q)$, a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $N_G(P \cap Q)$ contains $P \cap Q$. Because the order of $P \cap Q$ is maximal, this implies that any two distinct Sylow $p$- subgroups of $N_G(P \cap Q)$ intersect in exactly $P \cap Q$, since the above paragraph shows that a Sylow $p$-subgroup must be of the form $U \cap N_G(P \cap Q)$, for some $U \in Syl_p(G)$. So in fact $P \cap Q=O_p(N_G(P \cap Q))$.

Nicky Hekster
  • 49,281
  • In last paragraph, did you mean that any $p$-subgroup of $N_G(P\cap Q)$ contains $P\cap Q$, since for $H$ a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $N_G(P\cap Q)$, then $P\cap Q\leq xHx^{-1},;x\in N_G(P\cap Q)$, which implies $x(P\cap Q)x^{-1}=P\cap Q\leq H$? – Knt Jul 17 '19 at 09:58
  • Yes exactly. In general, a normal $p$-subgroup is contained in every Sylow $p$-subgroup. – Nicky Hekster Jul 17 '19 at 15:47
  • Shouldn't we first show that $N_G (P\cap Q)$ is not a $p$-group so that the sylow $p$-subgroup of it makes sense ? – Display name Oct 03 '21 at 02:54
  • This is implied by the proof. – Nicky Hekster Oct 03 '21 at 07:49
  • It runs the same as the start of the above proof: assume $P \neq Q$, whence $P \cap Q \subsetneq P$. Then by the normalizer grow principle, we have $P \cap Q \subsetneq N_P(P \cap Q)$. Let $R$ be a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $G$, containing the assumed $p$-subgroup $N_G(P \cap Q)$. Then $P \cap Q \subsetneq N_P(P \cap Q)=P \cap N_G(P \cap Q) \subseteq P \cap R$, violating the maximality of $|P \cap Q|$. – Nicky Hekster Oct 04 '21 at 08:21