tmpst Posted August 7, 2012 Posted August 7, 2012 This has kind of been bugging me fo a while. Let's say we have two groups and an isomorhism [math]\varphi: G_1 \cong G_2[/math]. If [math]H_1 \lhd G_1[/math] is a normal subgroup and we denote [math]H_2 = \varphi(H_1)[/math], then surely the quotient groups [math]G_1/H_1 \cong G_2/H_2[/math] are isomorphic as well. But what if we have a different isomophism [math]\theta: H_1 \cong H_3 \lhd G_2[/math]. Now we can't draw the conclusion that [math]G_1/H_1 \cong G_2/H_3[/math]. For example [math]\mathbb{Z} \cong \mathbb{Z}[/math] and [math]2\mathbb{Z}\cong 3\mathbb{Z}[/math], but clearly [math]\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z} \cong \mathbb{Z}_2 \ncong \mathbb{Z}_3 \cong \mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}[/math]. When can we substitute isomorphic groups when making quotient groups? If the groups are finite then nothing can conceivably can go wrong. But what about infinite groups?
uncool Posted August 7, 2012 Posted August 7, 2012 This has kind of been bugging me fo a while. Let's say we have two groups and an isomorhism [math]\varphi: G_1 \cong G_2[/math]. If [math]H_1 \lhd G_1[/math] is a normal subgroup and we denote [math]H_2 = \varphi(H_1)[/math], then surely the quotient groups [math]G_1/H_1 \cong G_2/H_2[/math] are isomorphic as well. But what if we have a different isomophism [math]\theta: H_1 \cong H_3 \lhd G_2[/math]. Now we can't draw the conclusion that [math]G_1/H_1 \cong G_2/H_3[/math]. For example [math]\mathbb{Z} \cong \mathbb{Z}[/math] and [math]2\mathbb{Z}\cong 3\mathbb{Z}[/math], but clearly [math]\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z} \cong \mathbb{Z}_2 \ncong \mathbb{Z}_3 \cong \mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}[/math]. When can we substitute isomorphic groups when making quotient groups? If the groups are finite then nothing can conceivably can go wrong. But what about infinite groups? It's not even true when taking finite groups. Let [math]G = \mathbb{Z}/4 \mathbb{Z} * \mathbb{Z}/2 \mathbb{Z}, H = \mathbb{Z}/2 \mathbb{Z}[/math]. Then we can embed [math]H[/math] in [math]G[/math] in a few different ways, and some will have quotients equal to [math](\mathbb{Z}/2 \mathbb{Z})^2[/math] and some [math]\mathbb{Z}/4 \mathbb{Z}[/math]. What I think you might be looking for is related to something called the Ext functor; depending on your level of knowledge, it might be a bit away. You'll see it in homological algebra. =Uncool- 1
tmpst Posted August 7, 2012 Author Posted August 7, 2012 (edited) It's not even true when taking finite groups. Let [math]G = \mathbb{Z}/4 \mathbb{Z} * \mathbb{Z}/2 \mathbb{Z}, H = \mathbb{Z}/2 \mathbb{Z}[/math]. Then we can embed [math]H[/math] in [math]G[/math] in a few different ways, and some will have quotients equal to [math](\mathbb{Z}/2 \mathbb{Z})^2[/math] and some [math]\mathbb{Z}/4 \mathbb{Z}[/math]. What I think you might be looking for is related to something called the Ext functor; depending on your level of knowledge, it might be a bit away. You'll see it in homological algebra. =Uncool- Ah, you'r right. Seems like I didn't think it through on the finite groups. I am familiar with homological algebra, so I will definitely look up the Ext functor. Thanks for your help! Edited August 7, 2012 by tmpst
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now