4

This question appears in my textbook's exercises, who can help me prove it?

If a group $G$ is the set-theoretic union of finitely-many cosets, $$G=x_1S_1\cup\cdots\cup x_nS_n$$ prove that at least one of the subgroups $S_i$ has finite index in $G$.

I think that the intersection of these cosets is either empty or a coset of the intersection of all the $S_i$. I want to start from this point to prove it. So I suppose none of these $S_i$ has finite index, but I don't know how to continue?

Bruno Joyal
  • 54,711
python3
  • 3,494
  • 4
    What are your thoughts on the problem thus far? What have you tried? The more information that you can give us, the easier it will be for us to tailor our answers to your needs. – Cameron Buie Oct 23 '13 at 03:01
  • 1
    Because the intersection of these cosets is either empty or a coset of the intersection of all the Si. I want to start from this point to prove. So I suppose none of these Si has finite index, but I don't know how to continue? – python3 Oct 23 '13 at 03:14

3 Answers3

2

For completeness, the Neumann proof is roughly as follows.

Let $r$ be the number of distinct subgroups in $S_1,S_2,\dots,S_n$. We will prove by induction on $r$.

If $r=1$, then $G=\bigcup_{i=1}^n x_iS_1$ and $S_1$ thus has finite index in $G$.

Now assume true for $r-1$ distinct groups, and assume $S_1,\dots,S_n$ has $r>1$ distinct groups, with $S_{m+1}=\cdots=S_n$ the same, and $S_i\neq S_n$ for $i\leq m$.

If $G=\bigcup_{i=m+1}^n x_iS_i$ then $S_n$ has finite index, from the $r=1$ case.

So assume $h\not\in \bigcup_{i=m+1}^n x_iS_i$. Then $hS_n\cap \left(\bigcup_{i=m+1}^n x_iS_i\right) = \emptyset$, since $hS_n$ is a distinct coset of $S_n$.

So $$hS_n \subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^m x_iS_i$$ So for any $x\in G$, $$xS_n=xh^{-1}hS_n\subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^m xh^{-1}x_iS_i$$

So we can replace $x_iS_i=x_iS_n$ for $i>m$ with a finite number of cosets of $S_1,\dots,S_m$. And now we have $G$ as a finite union of cosets of the $r-1$ distinct subgroups in $S_1,\dots,S_m$. And, by induction, one of those must have finite index in $G$.

(The harder result, that some $S_i$ has finite index smaller than $n$, does not follow from this argument, since we might increase the number of terms when we do the reduction from $r$ to $r-1$.)

Thomas Andrews
  • 177,126
1

I believe that this is a nontrivial result. It was proven in

B. H. Neumann, Groups covered by finitely many cosets, Publ. Math. Debrecen 3 (1954), 227–242. MR 17, 234.

Unfortunately, I could not find the original argument. Perhaps someone with a sharper Google-fu can retrieve it.

(I am curious to know what book you found this in. It seems like a cruel exercise, at least assuming that your book is an introductory book on group theory.)

Bruno Joyal
  • 54,711
  • This textbook called A First Course in Abstract Algebra is written by Joseph J.Rotman, this question appears in the chapter ofSubgroups and LAGRANGE'sTheorem. I – python3 Oct 24 '13 at 03:41
  • Is this a complicate question for an undergraduate student? – python3 Oct 24 '13 at 03:46
  • It would be if the assumption were that the $S_i$ were just any subset of $G$. However, you are given the extra structure that the $S_i$ aren't just subsets but also subgroups. This makes it an undergraduate level proof (albeit still difficult). – mathematics2x2life Oct 24 '13 at 22:03
1

This question in general (especially given a bit of research) seems very nontrivial. So I assume that what the book intends is that $G$ is the union of finitely many cosets which also happen to be subgroups. Otherwise, it would be difficult to define what one means by finite index as $|G:S|$ usually implies that $S$ is a subgroup of $G$ at the very least. So I will help you show this for $S_i$ being subgroups, my notation is that $S_i=g_iH_1$ for some subgroup $H_i$ and some $g_i \in G$.

It is natural to prove this by induction with some thought. Let $n$ be the number of subgroups you have broken $G$ into. We also assume that the $S_i$ are distinct (if they are not, this is easy to take care of). First case is $n=1$. Then $G=S_1$. So it is clear that $S_1$ has finite index (being 1).

Now assume that the statement is true for $n\geq 1$. Let consider $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^{n+1}$, the union of whose elements is all of $G$. No here is where I leave steps to you.

  1. First, suppose that $\{S_1,\cdots,S_n\}$ is the same as a different cover $\{H_1,\cdots,H_{n+1}\}$, where each of the $H_i$ are distinct. If $|G:H_{n+1}|$ is finite, does the result follow? Why?

  2. Now suppose that $|G:H_{n+1}|=\infty$. First, rewrite the union, $\cup_{i=1}^{n+1}S_i$ as $$G=\cup_{i=1}^kS_i\bigcup \cup_{j=1}^m H_i$$where $k=n+1-m$ with each of the $S_i \in \{H_1,\cdots,H_m\}$ for at least one of the subscripts $i=1,\cdots,k$. (This was the tough part) Now what does $|G:H_{n+1}|=\infty$ imply? Can you find an $aH_{n+1} \neq x_j H_{n+1}$ for all possible $x_j$?. Then what does that say about $aH_{n+1} \cap x_jH_{n+1}$? Then use the fact that $aH_{n+1} \subset G$ to write it as a finite union of subsets (specifically the $S_i$). Moreover, $x_jH_{n+1}$ are then all finite unions of the $S_i$. Then $G$ is a finite union of all the $H_i$. The result then follows from applying the induction hypothesis.

This is a not very lengthy, but thought intensive process. Just take it slowly and it is very doable.