What am I missing here? Trying to learn the semidirect product

142 Views Asked by At

I'm trying to understand the concept of the semidirect product of two groups.

An application is this answer to a question, where for $p>q$ primes, $q \mid p-1$, there is a non-abelian group of order $pq$ isomorphic to

$$C_p\rtimes_{\phi} C_q$$

for some homomorphism $\phi: C_q\to\mathrm{Aut}(C_p)\cong C_{p-1}.$

I'm trying to understand what this homomorphism looks like.

The answer states the following at point 2:

(Note the author defines $P=\langle x\mid x^p=1\rangle$ and $Q=\langle y\mid y^q=1\rangle$.)

Now, since $Q=\langle y\rangle$ normalizes $P=\langle x\rangle$, the map $\phi_k:P\to P$ given by $\phi_k(x)=y^kxy^{-k}$ is well defined. Moreover, it is clearly an automorphism with inverse $\phi_{-k}$. Finally, since $\phi_{k}\phi_j=\phi_{k+j}$, the map $y^k\mapsto\phi_k$ defines a homomorphism $\phi:Q\to \mathrm{Aut}(P)$.

Here's where I'm a bit confused - something I'm doing from here on must be wrong, but I'm not sure what. Let's represent $C_p$ and $C_q$ as addition modulo $p$ and $q$, thus the $pq$ elements of $C_p\rtimes_{\phi} C_q$ will be the tuples of the form $(a, b)$ for $a =0, ..., p-1$, $b=0, ..., q-1$.

In the equation $$\phi_k(x)=y^kxy^{-k}$$

$y \in C_q$ so it'll be of the form $(0, m)$ in the semidirect product, $x \in C_p$ will be of the form $(n, 0)$. Thus $y^kxy^{-k}=(0, mk) \circ (n, 0) \circ(0,-mk)$ where $\circ$ is the group operation of the semidirect product.

First, I thought this was just like addition on the tuples, and so I will always get $(n, 0)=x$. This interpretation must be wrong, since then $\phi_k$ would be the trivial homomorphism, and we just get the abelian direct product.

But $\circ$ is defined as $(n_1, h_1) \circ (n_2, h_2) = (n_1 \phi_{h_1}(n_2), h_1 h_2)$, which uses what will be $\phi_k$ in its own definition... so what's going wrong? I don't get how I can actually calculate binary operations on the group.

1

There are 1 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

One thing I see wrong is that despite choosing additive notation for $C_p$ and $C_q$, you then use multiplication, for example in the expression $h_1 h_2$. But this is a minor error. I suggest dumping additive notation, which you are free to do. Since $C_p$ and $C_q$ are being used as subgroups of a semidirect product which is not going to be abelian, stick with the multiplicative notation $C_p=\langle x \rangle$ and $C_q = \langle y \rangle$. Also, I'm going to ignore the $P,Q$ notation and other doubled up notations. Why confuse yourself by doubling up on notations when one single notation will do?

Regarding $\phi_k$, the expression $\phi_k(y) = y^k x y^{-k}$ is internal to the semidirect product. As you say, this does not make sense in giving an external definition for a homomorphism $C_q \mapsto \text{Aut}(C_p)$.

So, let's just give an external definition of a homomorphism $\Phi : C_q \to \text{Aut}(C_p)$.

Start with the fact that the generator $y \in C_q$ has order $q$. Our job is to choose $\Phi(y) \in \text{Aut}(C_p)$ to be a nontrivial automorphism of the group $C_p$ such that the order of $\Phi(y)$ in the group $\text{Aut}(C_p)$ is equal to $q$ (making the choice so that the order divides $q$ would be sufficient; but we can actually make it equal to $q$). Once that job is done, the formula $$\Phi(y^k) = \underbrace{\Phi(y) \circ \ldots \circ \Phi(y)}_{\text{$k$ times}} $$ becomes a well-defined homomorphism, using the composition operation $\circ$ which is the group operation on $\text{Aut}(C_p)$.

The fact that one may choose $\Phi(y)$ in this manner follows by combining the hypothesis $q \mid p-1$ with the theorem that $\text{Aut}(C_p)$ is a cyclic group of order $p-1$.

Now, you stated that you want to know what the homomorphism $C_q \mapsto \text{Aut}(C_p)$ looks like. So it's possible that this answer so far is not enough for you: perhaps you really want to know what an order $q$ element of the group $\text{Aut}(C_p)$ looks like. For that purpose, I would say that you should go read the proof of that theorem.