Timeline for The mysterious significance of local subgroups in finite group theory
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 26, 2023 at 21:13 | history | edited | Geoff Robinson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
inserted "of"
|
| Dec 26, 2023 at 20:25 | history | edited | Geoff Robinson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
corrected earlier omission
|
| Dec 25, 2023 at 20:27 | history | edited | Geoff Robinson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
correction of last sentence
|
| Dec 25, 2023 at 16:23 | history | edited | Geoff Robinson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Mentioned Mislins theorem, as suggested in comments.
|
| Dec 25, 2023 at 16:14 | history | edited | Geoff Robinson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 171 characters in body
|
| Dec 25, 2023 at 1:16 | comment | added | Steve D | Awesome answer (as always). May be worth mentioning Mislin's theorem here as well? | |
| Dec 24, 2023 at 14:41 | comment | added | Geoff Robinson | If you think of infinite groups, then there are some groups, such as Tarski monsters which have no non-trivial subgroup structure at all, and you can't do much other than prove they exist. | |
| Dec 24, 2023 at 14:37 | comment | added | semisimpleton | Thanks for the answer! I agree we quite naturally and inevitably run into $p$-local subgroups. What is mysterious is not that they contain useful information, it is the particular manner in which they encode useful information --- $p$-local subgroups facilitate "local-to-global" arguments. Other important subgroups, such as the commutator subgroup, the center, the Frattini subgroup...they are all important in their own ways, but $p$-local subgroups are significant in the particular sense that they keep mysteriously showing up in local-to-global arguments. | |
| Dec 24, 2023 at 13:40 | history | edited | Geoff Robinson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixed typo ( sign previously omitted)
|
| Dec 24, 2023 at 12:38 | history | answered | Geoff Robinson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |