let be a group, then a subset of is a subgroup of if it a group, inheriting the operator from . In such a case we write . if , we write .
necessary and sufficient conditions for subgroups
let be a group, , a subset of is a subgroup if and only if the following properties hold:
The identity is also in .
implies that ( is closed under the product operator inherited from ).
implies that ( is closed under inverses).
\begin{proof} if is a subgroup, 1,2,3 follow by definition. Now suppose . Then the above three conditions guarantee that is a group, with associativity following from inheriting the operator from .
\end{proof}
A simpler condition to guarantee subgroups
let be a group, and a subset of . then is a subgroup if and only if is non empty, and implies .
\begin{proof} Suppose was a subgroup of . then obviously, is non empty (it at least contains , the identity) and implies . Now, suppose was a non empty subset of , and that implies . We will show that : notice that implies . Now we show that is closed under inverses: Since , for any element , . Finally, we will show that is closed under products: Suppose . Then , (as shown earlier). Hence . Hence . Therefore by [[#^97f5ee]] is a subgroup of .
\end{proof}
The intersection of subgroups
Let be a group, and be subgroups of . Then, is a subgroup of .
\begin{proof} since is in both and , is non empty. Suppose . Then is in both and . Therefore, is in both and . Hence, . See :[[#^5c6133]].
\end{proof}
The intersection of finitely many Subgroups is a subgroup
Let All be subgroups of a group . Then, is a subgroup of .
Proof Outline
Use [[#^c26bc4]] with a natural induction argument.
Finiteness with product closure are sufficient conditions for a subgroup
Let be finite subset of a group , such that the identity . If implies , then is a subgroup of .
An intuition for the above idea:
![[diagram-20240712 (2).svg#invert_B]]
Imagine a finite set , closed under products, with the identity element in it. Starting from an arbitrary element , start taking left products, , and so on... each of these products are the images of under distinct left coset maps. so eventually, we have to hit , (we will show that we can't loop around without ever hitting ), basically allowing us to get closure under inverses.
\begin{proof}
Since is finite, let , we can index the elements of . We claim that the left coset maps are well defined from to . suppose and . then due to product closure.
Now, Consider the set of orbits of under each map in defined as . By two left coset maps never agree on the image of a particular element if , then in which has inverses, meaning that they are the identical left coset map in , Hence, they are identical in . Therefore has distinct elements, each of which lie in . Hence , given that is finite. Since there exists some such that . This is the inverse of an element . Hence is closed under inverses. see [[#^97f5ee]].