Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

It is well known that every group of exponent $n=2$ is abelian. I remember having seen that this is also the case for $n=3$. (can someone give a proof). How does this generalize to any $n$ or to any prime $p$.

share|improve this question
1  
I'm not sure I agree with your claim about exponent 3. See mathoverflow.net/questions/31797/… in particular the comments of Pete Clark and the answer of Francesco Polizzi –  Yemon Choi Jul 16 '10 at 5:43
5  
Wadim, "exponent" and "order" are not synonyms in finite group theory. The order of a finite group is its cardinality, while the exponent is the least $n$ with $x^n$ the identity for all $x$ in the group. –  Robin Chapman Jul 16 '10 at 7:20
7  
The group $G$ of upper triangular matrices over $\mathbb{F}_3$ with diagonal $(1,1,1)$ is of exponent $3$. –  Martin Brandenburg Jul 16 '10 at 8:53
2  
@marwalix: The result you "remember having seen" for n=3 might have been Jacobson's result for rings, not groups. See mathoverflow.net/questions/29590/… –  Doug Chatham Jul 16 '10 at 12:26
2  
@marwalix: For every finite group of exponent $3$, $3$ divides the order of $G$. So what you say is true but vacuous. @everybody: I am frankly surprised at the number of comments on this question: there's no research-level math issue here. –  Pete L. Clark Jul 17 '10 at 0:33
show 13 more comments

4 Answers

up vote 10 down vote accepted

The group defined by $\langle x,y,z; x^3 = y^3 = z^3 = 1, yz = zyx, xy = yx, xz = zx\rangle$ has order 27, exponent 3 and is non-abelian.

(Checking exponent 3 basically comes down to ensuring that $(yz)^3 = (y^2z)^3 = (yx^2)^3 = 1$. Or by using Gap.)

share|improve this answer
    
See also the comments at mathoverflow.net/questions/31797/… –  Yemon Choi Jul 16 '10 at 17:12
    
I should probably point out that this can be generalised to every $p>2$. That is, there always exists a group of order $p^{2n+1}$ with exponent $p$ such that $|Z(G)| = p$. Look up the classification of Extra-special $p$-groups for more details. –  user6503 Jul 21 '10 at 8:18
add comment

Well, any finitely generated group G of exponent 3 is finite by a classical theorem of Burnside. And since the order of every element is 3, the order of G must be a power of 3 by Cauchy's theorem. It follows that G is a finite nilpotent group. A similar argument shows that the same is true for any finitely generated group of exponent 4. This is unknown for 5, and false for 6.

Correction: it seems (see the answer of Primoz above) that any group of exponent 3 is nilpotent, altough it can be infinite if it not finitely generated.

share|improve this answer
    
See also the comments at mathoverflow.net/questions/31797/… –  Yemon Choi Jul 16 '10 at 17:12
add comment

Every group of exponent 3 is nilpotent of class at most 3, and this bound is best possible. The question whether finitely generated groups of exponent $n$ are finite is also known as the Burnside problem. There is an excellent historical overview of this problem, along with a list of relevant references.

share|improve this answer
add comment

The result I have seen is that every finite group $G$ of exponent $3$ such as $3$ does not divide $o(G)$ is abelian.

It generalises the following way : every n-abelian group (such as $(xy)^n=x^n y^n$) that has got no element (other than $1$) whose order divides $n(n-1)$ is abelian. One can refer to J.L Alperin A classification of n-abelian groups in Canadian Journal of Mathematics (1969)

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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.