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

The following question came up in the class I'm teaching right now. There definitely exist groups $G$ with subgroups $H$ such that there exists some $g \in G$ such that $g H g^{-1}$ is a proper subgroup of $H$. For instance, let $G$ be the (big) permutation group of $\mathbb{Z}$ (by the big permutation group, I mean that elements of $G$ can move infinitely many elements of $\mathbb{Z}$). Let $H \subset G$ be the big permutation group of $\mathbb{N}$ and let $g \in G$ be the permutation that takes $n \in \mathbb{Z}$ to $n+1 \in \mathbb{Z}$. Then $g H g^{-1}$ is a proper subgroup of $H$.

The same sort of trick produces many examples like this. However, a feature of all of them is that $G$ is "big" in some way -- for instance, $G$ is not finitely presentable. By Higman's embedding theorem, you can embed such a $G$ into a finitely presentable group, so there exist examples where $G$ is finitely presentable. However, in all the examples I can come up with, the subgroup $H$ is not finitely presentable. I'm pretty sure that there exist examples in which $H$ is finitely presentable. Does anyone know of one? Even better, are there examples in which both $G$ and $H$ are of finite type (ie have compact $K(\pi,1)$'s)?

share|cite|improve this question
This is somewhat reminiscent of the second problem in Noah's post – David Speyer Apr 5 '10 at 18:12
up vote 15 down vote accepted

There are very simple examples with $H\cong\mathbb{Z}$. For instance let $G$ be the affine linear group over $\mathbb{Q}$ consisting of all maps $x\mapsto ax+b$ where $a\in\mathbb{Q}^*$ and $b\in\mathbb{Q}$. Let $H$ be the set of maps $x\mapsto x+b$ with $b\in\mathbb{Z}$. Then $x\mapsto 2x$ conjugates $H$ into the proper subgroup $2H$.

In this example we could restrict $a$ to be a power of $2$ and $b$ to be a dyadic rational. Then the new $G$ has generators $a:x\mapsto 2x$ and $b:x\mapsto x+1$ and is defined by the single relation $h^2=ghg^{-1}$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks! I'm a little embarrassed that I missed this example! I'd like to point out the question… I just asked, which asks how far this can be generalized. – Andy Putman Apr 5 '10 at 18:50

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.