MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Is there any large $p$ for which it is proven that an infinite group with all non-trivial subgroups cyclical of order $p$ doesn't exist? And (if there is), which is the largest such $p$ ? All I could find is the $10^{75}$ upper bound, but I admit I didn"t look very far...

share|cite|improve this question
Aren't there small primes p > 700 for which the finitely generated infinite Burnside groups exist? Or are you looking for p even and nonprime? Gerhard "Ask Me About System Design" Paseman, 2012.10.17 – Gerhard Paseman Oct 18 '12 at 5:35
Huh? p must be prime, as we are looking for "every subgroup" – Feldmann Denis Oct 18 '12 at 7:29
I suspect that the largest prime for which this it is known that no Tarski Monster exists is 3 (but I might be wrong)! – Derek Holt Oct 18 '12 at 9:12
up vote 5 down vote accepted

The largest known prime for which existence of Tarski monster is not known is $997$, see Adyan, S. I.; Lysënok, I. G. Groups, all of whose proper subgroups are finite cyclic. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 55 (1991), no. 5, 933--990; translation in Math. USSR-Izv. 39 (1992), no. 2, 905–957. There are currently no methods of proving that for a given prime $p$ a Tarski monster does not exist except for showing that all finitely generated groups of exponent $p$ are finite. This gives hope that the bound $997$ can be lowered to $665$ (or below $300$ assuming the recent Adian's announcement is correct).

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.