Proof: I will record some difficult cases:
1575: Sylow analysis gives us n5=21. Since 21≠1mod52, we have P5∩Q5 of order 5 and due to index crunching we obtain |NG(P5∩Q5)|=3∗52. But now n5(NG(P5∩Q5))=1, even though P5≠Q5 and P5,Q5∈Syl5(NG(P5∩Q5)).
3465: Lemma 1: Let G be a group, let P∈Sylp(G) and assume NG(P) is cyclic. Then there are precisely np⋅φ(|NG(P)|) elements of order |NG(P)| in G. Proof: Since P⊴NG(P), we have distinct normalizers of Sylow p-subgroups for distinct Sylow p-subgroups, so that there are np distinct normalizers. As well, if |x|=|NG(P)|, then for some Q∈Sylp(G) we have Q⊴⟨ x ⟩ so that ⟨ x ⟩=NG(Q), and now every element of such an order is contained in a normalizer. Since these normalizers are conjugate to one another and are thus cyclic as well, we have each normalizer contains φ(|NG(P)|) elements of the specified order, and since no two distinct normalizers share elements of this order, we have the lemma proven. ◻
Lemma 2: A group G of order 231=3∗7∗11 has an element of order 33. Proof: We have P11⊴G, so that P3P11≅Z33 is a subgroup of G. ◻
By Sylow analysis on 3465, we obtain:n3∈{7,55,385} n5∈{11,21,231} n7∈{15,99} n11=45This reveals that NG(P11)≅Z77 (in particular, this implies G has no elements of order 33). By the first lemma, there are 45∗60=2700 elements of order 77 in G. By n11=45, we obtain 450 elements of order 11. Now, if n7=99, this would produce 594 elements of order 7, which overloads the order of G. Therefore n7=15, and now |NG(P7)|=231 and contains an element of order 33 by the second lemma, a terminating contradiction.
9765: By Sylow analysis and index crunching, we obtain:n3∈{31,217} n5∈{31,651} n7=155 n31=63We have |NG(P7)|=32∗7. Now, if n5=31, we have |NG(P5)|=32∗5∗7, so that P7⊴P5P7 and then 35∣|NG(P7)|=63, a contradiction. So n5=651 and NG(P5)≅Z15, so that by lemma 1 we have 5208 elements of order 15. With Sylow, we obtain at least 5208+651∗4+155∗6+63∗30=10,632 elements in G, an impossibility. ◻
No comments:
Post a Comment