Mixing
$x,y in Z_G(P)$ such that $gxg^{-1}=y$, show that there exists $nin N_G(P)$ such that $nxn^{-1}=y$.
$begingroup$
Past year paper question:
Let $P$ be a Sylow p-subgroup of a finite group $G$.
Define $Z_G(P)= { g in G mid pg=gp quad forall p in P }$
Suppose $x,y in Z_G(P)$ such that $gxg^{-1}=y$ for some $g in G$. Show that there exists $nin N_G(P)$ such that $nxn^{-1}=y$.
I'm guessing I need to to use the fact that $gxg^{-1}=y$, and maybe find some $z$ such that $zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ and $(zg) in N_G(P)$. Then $zg$ would be the $n$ that I need to find.
$zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ would mean that $zyz^{-1}=y$ so $z$ must commute with $y$. Also, $(zg) in N_G(P)$ would mean that $zgPg^{-1}z^{-1}=P$. But how does one proceed from here?
Some other things:
I get that $yp=py implies (gxg^{-1})p = (gxg^{-1})p$
I get some easy facts that $P triangleleft N_G(P), Z_G(P) leq N_G(P)$, and hence $PZ_G(P)$ is a subgroup of $N_G(P)$. And maybe I need to define some clever group action but I think of one that leads somewhere.
abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Past year paper question:
Let $P$ be a Sylow p-subgroup of a finite group $G$.
Define $Z_G(P)= { g in G mid pg=gp quad forall p in P }$
Suppose $x,y in Z_G(P)$ such that $gxg^{-1}=y$ for some $g in G$. Show that there exists $nin N_G(P)$ such that $nxn^{-1}=y$.
I'm guessing I need to to use the fact that $gxg^{-1}=y$, and maybe find some $z$ such that $zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ and $(zg) in N_G(P)$. Then $zg$ would be the $n$ that I need to find.
$zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ would mean that $zyz^{-1}=y$ so $z$ must commute with $y$. Also, $(zg) in N_G(P)$ would mean that $zgPg^{-1}z^{-1}=P$. But how does one proceed from here?
Some other things:
I get that $yp=py implies (gxg^{-1})p = (gxg^{-1})p$
I get some easy facts that $P triangleleft N_G(P), Z_G(P) leq N_G(P)$, and hence $PZ_G(P)$ is a subgroup of $N_G(P)$. And maybe I need to define some clever group action but I think of one that leads somewhere.
abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What would $n$ be? I think $g$ does not need to be inside $N_G(P)$.
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Here is a hint. $y=gxg^{-1} in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$, so $P$ and $gPg^{-1}$ are both Sylow $p$-subgroups of $Z_G(y)$, and hence they are conjugate in $Z_G(y)$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Indeed I did, @DerekHolt. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Nov 22 '18 at 15:17
$begingroup$
@DerekHolt Ok, so $Z_G(y)$ contains $P$, so $P$ is Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. $y in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$ means $y$ commutes with $gpg^{-1}$ for all $p$. Which means that $gpg^{-1} in Z_G(y)$ for all $p$, so $gPg^{-1}$ is also a Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. Then Sylow p-subgroups are conjugate implies there exist a $z$ such that $ zgPg^{-1}z^{-1} = P$. And then $n=zg$. Thank you so much. One more question: how do you know to consider $Z_G(y)$? I always get stuck when I need to think creatively...
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 15:31
$begingroup$
My solution is the same as the_foxes. I don't really know why one would think of considering $Z_G(y)$, but I knew from experience that you would need to use the conjugacy part of Sylow' Theorem somewhere. This type of argument is generally call the Frattini Argument. I guess $x in C_G(P)$ immediately implies $x^g in Z_G(P^g)$, but we already know that $y in Z_G(P)$, so both $P$ and $P^g$ centralize $y$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 18:44
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Past year paper question:
Let $P$ be a Sylow p-subgroup of a finite group $G$.
Define $Z_G(P)= { g in G mid pg=gp quad forall p in P }$
Suppose $x,y in Z_G(P)$ such that $gxg^{-1}=y$ for some $g in G$. Show that there exists $nin N_G(P)$ such that $nxn^{-1}=y$.
I'm guessing I need to to use the fact that $gxg^{-1}=y$, and maybe find some $z$ such that $zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ and $(zg) in N_G(P)$. Then $zg$ would be the $n$ that I need to find.
$zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ would mean that $zyz^{-1}=y$ so $z$ must commute with $y$. Also, $(zg) in N_G(P)$ would mean that $zgPg^{-1}z^{-1}=P$. But how does one proceed from here?
Some other things:
I get that $yp=py implies (gxg^{-1})p = (gxg^{-1})p$
I get some easy facts that $P triangleleft N_G(P), Z_G(P) leq N_G(P)$, and hence $PZ_G(P)$ is a subgroup of $N_G(P)$. And maybe I need to define some clever group action but I think of one that leads somewhere.
abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
$endgroup$
Past year paper question:
Let $P$ be a Sylow p-subgroup of a finite group $G$.
Define $Z_G(P)= { g in G mid pg=gp quad forall p in P }$
Suppose $x,y in Z_G(P)$ such that $gxg^{-1}=y$ for some $g in G$. Show that there exists $nin N_G(P)$ such that $nxn^{-1}=y$.
I'm guessing I need to to use the fact that $gxg^{-1}=y$, and maybe find some $z$ such that $zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ and $(zg) in N_G(P)$. Then $zg$ would be the $n$ that I need to find.
$zgxg^{-1}z^{-1}=y$ would mean that $zyz^{-1}=y$ so $z$ must commute with $y$. Also, $(zg) in N_G(P)$ would mean that $zgPg^{-1}z^{-1}=P$. But how does one proceed from here?
Some other things:
I get that $yp=py implies (gxg^{-1})p = (gxg^{-1})p$
I get some easy facts that $P triangleleft N_G(P), Z_G(P) leq N_G(P)$, and hence $PZ_G(P)$ is a subgroup of $N_G(P)$. And maybe I need to define some clever group action but I think of one that leads somewhere.
abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups
abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
edited Jan 11 at 17:41
the_fox
2,83721537
2,83721537
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
asked Nov 22 '18 at 14:02
eatfoodeatfood
1777
1777
$begingroup$
What would $n$ be? I think $g$ does not need to be inside $N_G(P)$.
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Here is a hint. $y=gxg^{-1} in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$, so $P$ and $gPg^{-1}$ are both Sylow $p$-subgroups of $Z_G(y)$, and hence they are conjugate in $Z_G(y)$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Indeed I did, @DerekHolt. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Nov 22 '18 at 15:17
$begingroup$
@DerekHolt Ok, so $Z_G(y)$ contains $P$, so $P$ is Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. $y in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$ means $y$ commutes with $gpg^{-1}$ for all $p$. Which means that $gpg^{-1} in Z_G(y)$ for all $p$, so $gPg^{-1}$ is also a Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. Then Sylow p-subgroups are conjugate implies there exist a $z$ such that $ zgPg^{-1}z^{-1} = P$. And then $n=zg$. Thank you so much. One more question: how do you know to consider $Z_G(y)$? I always get stuck when I need to think creatively...
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 15:31
$begingroup$
My solution is the same as the_foxes. I don't really know why one would think of considering $Z_G(y)$, but I knew from experience that you would need to use the conjugacy part of Sylow' Theorem somewhere. This type of argument is generally call the Frattini Argument. I guess $x in C_G(P)$ immediately implies $x^g in Z_G(P^g)$, but we already know that $y in Z_G(P)$, so both $P$ and $P^g$ centralize $y$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 18:44
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
What would $n$ be? I think $g$ does not need to be inside $N_G(P)$.
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Here is a hint. $y=gxg^{-1} in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$, so $P$ and $gPg^{-1}$ are both Sylow $p$-subgroups of $Z_G(y)$, and hence they are conjugate in $Z_G(y)$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Indeed I did, @DerekHolt. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Nov 22 '18 at 15:17
$begingroup$
@DerekHolt Ok, so $Z_G(y)$ contains $P$, so $P$ is Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. $y in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$ means $y$ commutes with $gpg^{-1}$ for all $p$. Which means that $gpg^{-1} in Z_G(y)$ for all $p$, so $gPg^{-1}$ is also a Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. Then Sylow p-subgroups are conjugate implies there exist a $z$ such that $ zgPg^{-1}z^{-1} = P$. And then $n=zg$. Thank you so much. One more question: how do you know to consider $Z_G(y)$? I always get stuck when I need to think creatively...
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 15:31
$begingroup$
My solution is the same as the_foxes. I don't really know why one would think of considering $Z_G(y)$, but I knew from experience that you would need to use the conjugacy part of Sylow' Theorem somewhere. This type of argument is generally call the Frattini Argument. I guess $x in C_G(P)$ immediately implies $x^g in Z_G(P^g)$, but we already know that $y in Z_G(P)$, so both $P$ and $P^g$ centralize $y$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 18:44
$begingroup$
What would $n$ be? I think $g$ does not need to be inside $N_G(P)$.
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 14:14
$begingroup$
What would $n$ be? I think $g$ does not need to be inside $N_G(P)$.
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 14:14
2
2
$begingroup$
Here is a hint. $y=gxg^{-1} in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$, so $P$ and $gPg^{-1}$ are both Sylow $p$-subgroups of $Z_G(y)$, and hence they are conjugate in $Z_G(y)$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Here is a hint. $y=gxg^{-1} in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$, so $P$ and $gPg^{-1}$ are both Sylow $p$-subgroups of $Z_G(y)$, and hence they are conjugate in $Z_G(y)$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Indeed I did, @DerekHolt. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Nov 22 '18 at 15:17
$begingroup$
Indeed I did, @DerekHolt. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Nov 22 '18 at 15:17
$begingroup$
@DerekHolt Ok, so $Z_G(y)$ contains $P$, so $P$ is Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. $y in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$ means $y$ commutes with $gpg^{-1}$ for all $p$. Which means that $gpg^{-1} in Z_G(y)$ for all $p$, so $gPg^{-1}$ is also a Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. Then Sylow p-subgroups are conjugate implies there exist a $z$ such that $ zgPg^{-1}z^{-1} = P$. And then $n=zg$. Thank you so much. One more question: how do you know to consider $Z_G(y)$? I always get stuck when I need to think creatively...
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 15:31
$begingroup$
@DerekHolt Ok, so $Z_G(y)$ contains $P$, so $P$ is Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. $y in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$ means $y$ commutes with $gpg^{-1}$ for all $p$. Which means that $gpg^{-1} in Z_G(y)$ for all $p$, so $gPg^{-1}$ is also a Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. Then Sylow p-subgroups are conjugate implies there exist a $z$ such that $ zgPg^{-1}z^{-1} = P$. And then $n=zg$. Thank you so much. One more question: how do you know to consider $Z_G(y)$? I always get stuck when I need to think creatively...
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 15:31
$begingroup$
My solution is the same as the_foxes. I don't really know why one would think of considering $Z_G(y)$, but I knew from experience that you would need to use the conjugacy part of Sylow' Theorem somewhere. This type of argument is generally call the Frattini Argument. I guess $x in C_G(P)$ immediately implies $x^g in Z_G(P^g)$, but we already know that $y in Z_G(P)$, so both $P$ and $P^g$ centralize $y$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 18:44
$begingroup$
My solution is the same as the_foxes. I don't really know why one would think of considering $Z_G(y)$, but I knew from experience that you would need to use the conjugacy part of Sylow' Theorem somewhere. This type of argument is generally call the Frattini Argument. I guess $x in C_G(P)$ immediately implies $x^g in Z_G(P^g)$, but we already know that $y in Z_G(P)$, so both $P$ and $P^g$ centralize $y$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 18:44
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'll write $C_G(P)$ for the centraliser of $P$ in $G$, which is what you have defined as $Z_G(P)$. We are given $x, y in C_G(P)$ which are conjugate in $G$ and we want to show that they are in fact conjugate in $N_G(P)$.
So let $y=x^g$ for some $g in G$ and note that since $x in C_G(P)$ we have $y=x^g in C_G(P)^g = C_G(P^g)$. Then $P^g leq C_G(y)$, thus $P^g$ is a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$. We also have that $y in C_G(P)$ implies $P leq C_G(y)$ so $P$ is also a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$.
We deduce that $P$ and $P^g$ are conjugate in $C_G(y)$ by Sylow's theorem, so $(P^g)^c = P$ for some $c in C_G(y)$. Since $(P^g)^c = P^{gc}$ we see that $gc$ normalises $P$, thus $gc in N_G(P)$ and also $x^{gc}=y^c=y$, so $x, y$ are conjugate in $N_G(P)$, which is what we wanted to prove.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f3009174%2fx-y-in-z-gp-such-that-gxg-1-y-show-that-there-exists-n-in-n-gp-su%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'll write $C_G(P)$ for the centraliser of $P$ in $G$, which is what you have defined as $Z_G(P)$. We are given $x, y in C_G(P)$ which are conjugate in $G$ and we want to show that they are in fact conjugate in $N_G(P)$.
So let $y=x^g$ for some $g in G$ and note that since $x in C_G(P)$ we have $y=x^g in C_G(P)^g = C_G(P^g)$. Then $P^g leq C_G(y)$, thus $P^g$ is a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$. We also have that $y in C_G(P)$ implies $P leq C_G(y)$ so $P$ is also a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$.
We deduce that $P$ and $P^g$ are conjugate in $C_G(y)$ by Sylow's theorem, so $(P^g)^c = P$ for some $c in C_G(y)$. Since $(P^g)^c = P^{gc}$ we see that $gc$ normalises $P$, thus $gc in N_G(P)$ and also $x^{gc}=y^c=y$, so $x, y$ are conjugate in $N_G(P)$, which is what we wanted to prove.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'll write $C_G(P)$ for the centraliser of $P$ in $G$, which is what you have defined as $Z_G(P)$. We are given $x, y in C_G(P)$ which are conjugate in $G$ and we want to show that they are in fact conjugate in $N_G(P)$.
So let $y=x^g$ for some $g in G$ and note that since $x in C_G(P)$ we have $y=x^g in C_G(P)^g = C_G(P^g)$. Then $P^g leq C_G(y)$, thus $P^g$ is a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$. We also have that $y in C_G(P)$ implies $P leq C_G(y)$ so $P$ is also a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$.
We deduce that $P$ and $P^g$ are conjugate in $C_G(y)$ by Sylow's theorem, so $(P^g)^c = P$ for some $c in C_G(y)$. Since $(P^g)^c = P^{gc}$ we see that $gc$ normalises $P$, thus $gc in N_G(P)$ and also $x^{gc}=y^c=y$, so $x, y$ are conjugate in $N_G(P)$, which is what we wanted to prove.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'll write $C_G(P)$ for the centraliser of $P$ in $G$, which is what you have defined as $Z_G(P)$. We are given $x, y in C_G(P)$ which are conjugate in $G$ and we want to show that they are in fact conjugate in $N_G(P)$.
So let $y=x^g$ for some $g in G$ and note that since $x in C_G(P)$ we have $y=x^g in C_G(P)^g = C_G(P^g)$. Then $P^g leq C_G(y)$, thus $P^g$ is a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$. We also have that $y in C_G(P)$ implies $P leq C_G(y)$ so $P$ is also a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$.
We deduce that $P$ and $P^g$ are conjugate in $C_G(y)$ by Sylow's theorem, so $(P^g)^c = P$ for some $c in C_G(y)$. Since $(P^g)^c = P^{gc}$ we see that $gc$ normalises $P$, thus $gc in N_G(P)$ and also $x^{gc}=y^c=y$, so $x, y$ are conjugate in $N_G(P)$, which is what we wanted to prove.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
$endgroup$
I'll write $C_G(P)$ for the centraliser of $P$ in $G$, which is what you have defined as $Z_G(P)$. We are given $x, y in C_G(P)$ which are conjugate in $G$ and we want to show that they are in fact conjugate in $N_G(P)$.
So let $y=x^g$ for some $g in G$ and note that since $x in C_G(P)$ we have $y=x^g in C_G(P)^g = C_G(P^g)$. Then $P^g leq C_G(y)$, thus $P^g$ is a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$. We also have that $y in C_G(P)$ implies $P leq C_G(y)$ so $P$ is also a Sylow $p$-subgroup of $C_G(y)$.
We deduce that $P$ and $P^g$ are conjugate in $C_G(y)$ by Sylow's theorem, so $(P^g)^c = P$ for some $c in C_G(y)$. Since $(P^g)^c = P^{gc}$ we see that $gc$ normalises $P$, thus $gc in N_G(P)$ and also $x^{gc}=y^c=y$, so $x, y$ are conjugate in $N_G(P)$, which is what we wanted to prove.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
answered Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
the_foxthe_fox
2,83721537
2,83721537
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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%2f3009174%2fx-y-in-z-gp-such-that-gxg-1-y-show-that-there-exists-n-in-n-gp-su%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
$begingroup$
What would $n$ be? I think $g$ does not need to be inside $N_G(P)$.
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 14:14
2
$begingroup$
Here is a hint. $y=gxg^{-1} in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$, so $P$ and $gPg^{-1}$ are both Sylow $p$-subgroups of $Z_G(y)$, and hence they are conjugate in $Z_G(y)$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 14:18
$begingroup$
Indeed I did, @DerekHolt. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– DonAntonio
Nov 22 '18 at 15:17
$begingroup$
@DerekHolt Ok, so $Z_G(y)$ contains $P$, so $P$ is Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. $y in Z_G(gPg^{-1})$ means $y$ commutes with $gpg^{-1}$ for all $p$. Which means that $gpg^{-1} in Z_G(y)$ for all $p$, so $gPg^{-1}$ is also a Sylow p-subgroup of $Z_G(y)$. Then Sylow p-subgroups are conjugate implies there exist a $z$ such that $ zgPg^{-1}z^{-1} = P$. And then $n=zg$. Thank you so much. One more question: how do you know to consider $Z_G(y)$? I always get stuck when I need to think creatively...
$endgroup$
– eatfood
Nov 22 '18 at 15:31
$begingroup$
My solution is the same as the_foxes. I don't really know why one would think of considering $Z_G(y)$, but I knew from experience that you would need to use the conjugacy part of Sylow' Theorem somewhere. This type of argument is generally call the Frattini Argument. I guess $x in C_G(P)$ immediately implies $x^g in Z_G(P^g)$, but we already know that $y in Z_G(P)$, so both $P$ and $P^g$ centralize $y$.
$endgroup$
– Derek Holt
Nov 22 '18 at 18:44