Welcome to MathOverflow

Question

3

Let $G$ be a finite abelian group, and $g_1, \ldots, g_n \in G$ such that the cyclic groups that they generate are in direct sum $\langle g_1 \rangle \oplus \ldots \oplus \langle g_n \rangle$. Is it always possible to find elements $h_1, \ldots, h_n \in G$ and integers $a_1, \ldots, a_n$ such that the following three facts hold

1) $g_i= a_i h_i$, for all $1 \leq i \leq n$,

2) the cyclic subgroups generated by the $h_i$ are in direct sum, $H:=\langle h_1 \rangle \oplus \ldots \langle h_n \rangle$.

3) $H$ is a direct summand of $G$?

(I asked this question on math.stackexchange, see http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/199928/smallest-pure-subgroup-containing-a-fixed-subgroup)

edited Sep 21 at 13:14

asked Sep 21 at 12:44

calc
53●5

Do you really mean that the $g_i$'s generate a cyclic group $C$? if so, why can't you take all of the $h_i$ to be the same element, a generator of the largest cyclic group containing $C$. My first thought is that this solution would satisfy (1), (2) and (3)... But I could be wrong. – Nick Gill Sep 21 at 13:04

No, I have edited my question. "The cyclic groupS that they generate" insted of "The cyclic group that they generate" – calc Sep 21 at 13:17

1

It should be obvious. Your $H$ is the pure subgroup generated by $g_i$-s, and in finite groups, pure subgroups should be the same as direct summands. – Bugs Bunny Sep 21 at 13:21

@Bugs Bunny Can you give a reference for the "pure subgroup generated by"? Also, how do you find the generators $h_i$ each dividing $g_i$? – calc Sep 21 at 13:23

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_subgroup – Bugs Bunny Sep 21 at 13:24

show 6 more comments

Derek Holt · Accepted Answer · 2012-09-21 22:16:25Z UTC

8

I am not convinced that this is true, because the pure subgroup generated by the $g_i$ might not have the stipulated form as a direct sum of the $h_i$.

Let $G = {\mathbb Z}/16{\mathbb Z} \oplus {\mathbb Z}/4{\mathbb Z}$, $n=1$, and $g_1=(4,2)$. What could $h_1$ be?

We can prove that there is no such $h_1$ as follows. For any $g \in G$ of order 16, we have $8g = (8,0)$. Since $(8,0) \in \langle h_1 \rangle$, $\langle h_1 \rangle$ cannot be a direct summand of $G$ of order 4. So $\langle h_1 \rangle$ would have to be a direct summand of order 16. But then $4h_1 = (4,0)$ or $(12,0)$ and so $g_1 \not\in \langle h_1 \rangle$.

edited Sep 21 at 22:16

answered Sep 21 at 14:43

Derek Holt
6,868●1●12●27

	I think you mean $8g = (8,0)$... – Arturo Magidin Sep 21 at 17:02
	Thanks but there is something I am missing. Why do you not start with $g_1=(2,1)$? – calc Sep 21 at 17:03
	Anyway I am still not convinced about the pure subgroup generated by the $g_i$. What is it? You generate a subgroup with the $g_i$. Then you take the roots. Then? Is this a subgroup at all? Or do you have to still take the subgroup generated and continue? – calc Sep 21 at 18:41
	@calc: A pure subgroup $S$ of $G$ is a subgroup such that $nG\cap S=nS$ for all $n$. You may not need to take roots; for example, in $G=\mathbf{Z}_4\times\mathbf{Z}_2$, $S=\langle (1,1)\rangle$ is pure: $2G\cap S = \{(0,0),(2,0)\} = 2S$, and that's the only one you need to worry about. Even though $2(1,0)\in S$, you do not need $(1,0)$ in $S$ for $S$ to be pure, you just need $2(1,0)$ to be twice something in $S$. – Arturo Magidin Sep 21 at 21:27
	@Calc: But if you have a subgroup $S$ of $G$, and you let $H=\{g\in G\mid ng\in S, ng\neq 0\}$ (which I suspect is what you mean; otherwise, in a torsion group, adding "all roots" would mean adding the entire thing), then $H$ need not be a subgroup; e.g., with $G$ and $S$ as above, $(1,0)\in H$ (since $2(1,0)=(2,0)\in S$ is nonzero), and $(1,1)\in H$ (since it is in $S$), but $(1,1)-(0,1)\notin H$. – Arturo Magidin Sep 21 at 21:31

show 7 more comments

On the existence of a direct summand containing a fixed subgroup

Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

1 Answer

You can accept an answer to one of your own questions by clicking the check mark next to it. This awards 15 reputation points to the person who answered and 2 reputation points to you.