Elementary Question Regarding Subgroups in Abstract Algebra

49 Views Asked by At

I seem to be twisting myself into pretzels,can someone help me with the following question?

Let $(G,*)$ be a group and $H\unlhd G$ and $K\unlhd G$ (i.e $H$ and $G$ are normal subgroups of $G$).Prove that $HK$ is a subgroup of $G$,where $HK=\{hk:h \in H \text{ and } k \in K\}$.


The book gives the [hint] to use the following :

Let $(G,*)$ be a group and let $a \in G$. Suppose $N\unlhd G$ then the following holds:

  • For all $n \in N$ there exists a $j \in N$ such that na=aj.
  • For all $n \in N$ there exists a $k \in N$ such that an=ka.

Since different books may follow different approaches,the lemma that seems to be used throughout mine is the following:

Lemma(Subgroup Lemma)

Let $(G,*)$ be a group and $H \subseteq G$. Then $H$ is a subgroup of $G$ if and only if the following holds:

  • (a) $e \in H$ (where e is the identity element of G)
  • (b) $ab \in H$ whenever $a,b \in H$
  • (c) $a^{-1} \in H$ whenever $a \in H$

My twisted attempt:

Let $(G,*)$ be a group and $H\unlhd G$ and $K\unlhd G$ (i.e $H$ and $G$ are normal subgroups of $G$).Suppose $HK=\{hk:h \in H \text{ and } k \in K\}$. To prove that $HK$ is a subgroup of $G$,the following must hold:

(i)$HK \subseteq G$ , (ii) Subgroup Lemmas defined proven true.

Regarding (i)

Let $h \in H$ and $k \in K$.With $H,K \subseteq G$, then $h,k \in G$. Since $(G,*)$ is a group then$(h*k) \in G$ and $HK \subseteq G$ as required ?

Regarding (ii)

(a) Prove $e \in HK$

Since $(G,*)$ is a group then it satisfies the three group axioms and there exists an element $e \in G$ such that for all $g\in G$, $g*e=e*g=g$. Since $H$ and $K$ are normal subgroups of $G$ then by subgroup lemma, $e \in H$ and $e \in K$. With $(e*e) \in HK$ and $(e*e)=e$ then $e \in HK$ as required ?

(b) Prove $ab \in HK$ whenever $a,b \in HK$

Let $a,b \in HK$ , then by definition of $HK$ , $a=hk$ and $b=ij$ for some $h,i \in H$ and $k,j \in K$. the objective is to prove that $(ab) \in HK$, or equivalently that $(ab)=cd$ for some $c \in H$ and $d \in K$.

Let $g \in G$ and note that by [hint above] : since $i \in H$ there exists some $r \in H$ such that ig=gr and therefore ij=jr. With $(ab)=(hk)(ij)=(hk)(jr)=h(kj)r$ by the associative axiom of groups.

Let d=(kj) and note that since $k,j \in K$ and $K \unlhd G$ then $(kj) \in K$ and therefore $d \in K$.

With $(ab)=h(kj)r=hdr$,the [hint above] suggests that : since $d \in K$, there exists a $p \in K$ such that $dg=gp$ and therefore $dr=rd$. Hence $(ab)=h(kj)r=h(dr)=h(rd)=(hr)d$.

Letting $c=(hr)$ then $c \in H$ since $h,r \in H$ and $H \unlhd G$ imply that $(hr) \in H$.

Finally $(ab)=cd$ as required?

(c) Prove $a^{-1} \in H$ whenever $a \in H$

...will do later if the attempt so far is OK

Thank you for your help

1

There are 1 best solutions below

4
On BEST ANSWER

The ideas in your proof, in broad lines, seem correct to me (although there would be a faster way to prove the statement, i.e. using the lemma just once).

It seems to me, anyway, that you are using a stronger (and wrong) version of the lemma: when you say, in the second paragraph of (b), that "there exists some $r\in H$ such that ig=gr and therefore ij=jr", I think you are making a mistake. The lemma does not assert that there exists a $r$ that does the job for every $g\in G$, it just tells you that for every $g$ such a $r_g$ can be found. This is exactly what you need for the proof anyway, so with this caveat your proof works.