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

Hello! I have a problem with the following Lemma, which is mentioned in Serre's book "Trees" on page 60. In the book it is the Example 6.3.4.:

Lemma: Let $G$ be a group acting (without inversion) on a tree $X$. Let $X^G$ be the set of fixed points of $G$ in $X$ ($X^G$ is a subgraph of $X$). Let $G'$ be a subgroup of finite index in $G$ with $X^{G'}\neq\emptyset$. Then $X^G\neq\emptyset$.

Proof: Let $H$ be a normal subgroup of finite index in $G$ contained in $G'$ (for example, the intersection of the conjugates of $G'$). We have $X^H\neq\emptyset$ and $G/H$ acts on the tree $X^H$.

  • since $G/H$ is finite, it has a fixed point, whence $X^G\neq\emptyset$.

Question 1: Why is the index of $H$ in $G$ finite? Couldn't it happen, that the intersection of all conjugates of $G'$ equals the trivail group in $G$?

Question 2: If $G/H$ is finite, why it is clear that the action of $G/H$ has a fixed point in $X^H$?

Question 3:(Proof of Prop. 27, page 65) If we look at the situation where $G$ is a fin. generated nilpotent group, we can choose $H$ such that $G/H$ is cyclic (not necessary finite, i think). Now let $X^H\neq\emptyset$. Then in the book Serre concludes, that $G/H$ has a fixed point and whence $X^G\neq\emptyset$.

Question 2 and 3 are on the same conclusion, i think. It seems like he use the same argument. But which one is it?

Thanks for thinking about it and help.

share|cite|improve this question
Your question 1 is a known exercise in group theory. See and . – darij grinberg Sep 26 '11 at 16:27
For questions 2 and 3, it might be useful to remind us of how Serre defines a tree (there seem to be multiple definitions of infinite trees) and what "without inversion" means (I hope it means something that implies that the order of $G/H$ is odd, since otherwise there can be counterexamples). – darij grinberg Sep 26 '11 at 16:33
OK, I have looked up in Serre what "tree" and "without inversion" mean. (For the record: A tree is a connected graph - possibly infinite, possibly even locally infinite - without cycles. An automorphism of a tree is said to be "without inversion" if no two vertices which it maps to each other are connected by an edge.) If $X^H$ is a finite subtree, then question 2 is answered by . – darij grinberg Sep 26 '11 at 16:40
Even if $X^H$ is not a finite subtree, we can reduce question 2 to the case of a finite subtree. In fact, let me show that any finite-order automorphism of a tree either has a fixed point or an inversion. To prove this, consider any vertex $x$ of the tree, and denote the automorphism by $f$. Let $F$ be the set of images of $x$ under $f^i$ for $i\in\mathbb N$. Since $f$ is finite-order, this set $F$ is finite. Also, $F$ is clearly an $f$-invariant set. Add to the set $F$ all intermediate vertices on the shortest paths connecting vertices of $F$ (pairwise). The resulting set is still ... – darij grinberg Sep 26 '11 at 16:46
... $f$-invariant, because the image of an intermediate vertex on the shortest path connecting two vertices $x$ and $y$ under $f$ must itself be an intermediate vertex on the shortest path connecting the vertices $f\left(x\right)$ and $f\left(y\right)$. Also, the resulting set is connected, as can be easily seen. Thus, we have obtained a connected finite $f$-invariant subset of the vertex set of our tree. In other words, we have obtained a finite $f$-invariant subtree. Now apply the theorem from (note that I also ... – darij grinberg Sep 26 '11 at 16:48
up vote 2 down vote accepted

The first two questions have been answered. The third question is also easy. If $G/H$ is cyclic and we assume that $H$ has fixed points, let $T$ be the subtree of fixed points of $H$. Then $G/H$ acts on that tree. Since $G/H$ is cyclic and the action is without inversions, it either has a fixed point, whence $G$ has a fixed point or it has a stable line $l$ (prove it!). The first option leads to a fixed point for the whole $G$ and the second option leads to a stable line for the whole $G$ on which $G$ acts as $G/H$ (since $H$ fixes the line pointwise).

I guess the confusion came from not reading the whole statement of Serre. Serre does not claim that $G/H$ always fixes a point (that would be silly since $\mathbb Z$ acts on the tree $\mathbb R$ by translations). He only says that either it fixes a point or stabilizes a line in $X^H$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Nice. Yes. In my conclusion, i always thought, that in our counter example we only have option to get this fixed point. But you right, we still have in the case of $G/H$ the second option, which is immediately clear, since if $G/H$ is infinite it is isomorphic to $\mathbb Z$. Thank you very much! It was an error in reosoning of me. – Eric Sep 27 '11 at 8:05
The book said, you should apply Porp. 26. but you have to use Prop 25. then your argumentation is immedietaly clear. – Eric Sep 27 '11 at 8:11

I guess question 2 has been answered in detail (though the proof given is for cyclic finite groups ?), but I think Serre also proves it in his book explicitly on Page 36, prop 19 (If a group G acts on a tree X without inversion, then X having an invariant vertex under G action, is equivalent to saying the set G.P is bounded for some vertex P). If G is finite, clearly G.P is a finite set and hence of finite diameter[I think we define two vertices to be connected, if they are joined by a finite path]

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.