Lemma: Let be an abelian group. If is a prime factor of then contains at least one element of order
Proof: The lemma is trivial when , which we shall use to start an induction. Assume is composite. Then contains a proper subgroup. Choose a proper subgroup of maximum order. If then by induction contains an element of order , so assume . Then take some element . Let be the order of . Consider the group . Since is abelian, we have thus is a group. But since it strictly contains , we have by maximality of .
Now contains elements where . Thus . Since the divides the left-hand side, and , we must have , and is an element of order .
If the order of a group is divisible by but by no higher power of for some prime then any subgroup of of order is called a Sylow group corresponding to .
Theorem: Every group possesses at least one Sylow group corresponding to each prime factor of .
Proof: The theorem is immediate when , which we shall use to start an induction. Write where . Decompose into classes of conjugate elements, and pick elements from each class. Recall if denotes the size of the class containing we have . Also recall the normalizer of satisfies . We have two cases:
Case 1: Suppose there exists with and . Then is less than and divisible by . By inductive hypthoesis, possesses a subgroup of order which is the Sylow group corresponding to .
Case 2: For all , we have or . We have for self-conjugate elements, and we must have at least one of these since is self-conjugate. Let be the number of self-conjugate elements. Then for some integer , hence . Thus the order of the center is divisible by . Since it is abelian, by the lemma it contains at least one element that commutes with all elements and has order . Then is a normal subgroup of and has order . By the inductive hypothesis contains a Sylow group of order , which we write where is a subgroup of . Then , thus and is a Sylow group of corresponding to .
Theorem: [Cauchy] Let be a group. If is a prime factor of then contains at least one element of order
Proof: Let be a Sylow group of of order . If then the order of is for some . Then has order .
All subgroups conjugate to a Sylow group are themselves Sylow groups. It turns out the converse is true.
Theorem: All Sylow groups belonging to the same prime are conjugates.
Proof: Let be subgroups of of order . Recall we can decompose relative to and : and where is the size of . We have and where . Thus dividing by gives Now is a subgroup of , hence is some nonnegative power of and is at most . Since , we must have for some , in other words . Then has the same order as and is contained in , thus and similarly . Hence implying that are conjugate.
Corollary: A Sylow group is unique if and only if it is a normal subgroup.
Theorem: If there are exactly Sylow groups of a group corresponding to a prime then and divides .
Proof: We know that the number of distinct Sylow groups is equal to the number of distinct conjugates. Let be some Sylow group corresponding to and let be the normalizer of . Recall thus divides .
Every satisfies thus , Hence . Thus where .
Decompose as the disjoint sets Then where is the order of the group . Without loss of generality assume , hence . Now dividing by gives Now suppose for some . Then , implying . Now possesses a Sylow group of order , and we have already found two: . But is normal in thus must be the unique Sylow group, hence . Since is the normalizer of we must have and hence , which is impossible unless .
Thus all terms in the above summation are divisble by except for the first term which is equal to one.
Theorem: Any group of order for primes satisfying and is abelian.
Proof: We have already shown this for so assume . Let be a Sylow group of corresponding to . The number of such subgroups is a divisor of and also equal to modulo . Also . Then since the number of such subgroups cannot be equal to , it must be equal to one. By the above corollary we have that is normal in of order . Similarly we can find a group normal in of order .
Then , which by the product theorem is a subgroup order . But since they only have the identity element in common thus . Also, recall these conditions also imply every element of commutes with every element of . Then every element of has the form and is clearly abelian
A prime power group is a group whose order is a power of a prime. [It seems that nowadays they are referred to as -groups.] All Sylow groups are prime power groups. Recall that a group of order for a prime has at least one nontrivial self-conjugate element, thus we can find a self-conjugate element of order . Let be such an element. Then for any , and is a normal subgroup of order . In general:
Theorem: A group of order for a prime contains at least one normal subgroup of order for any .
Proof: The theorem is true for because in this case the group is abelian. We shall use this case to base an induction.
Suppose is a group of order for . Then let be a normal subgroup of of order . Then has order which by inductive assumption has an invariant subgroup of order which has the form for some normal subgroup in with order .
Corollary: All prime power groups are soluble.
Proof: A group of order has a normal subgroup of order which in turn contains a normal subgroup of order , and so on. Thus we can construct the composition series
Example: There is no simple group of order 200. For let be a group with order 200. Then since , contains Sylow groups of order 25 where and . Thus which is impossible unless . Thus there exists a unique normal Sylow group of order 25, and hence the group is not stimple.
Example: There is no simple group of order 30. Suppose there is such a group. Then none of its Sylow groups are unique, implying it has Sylow groups of order 5, hence there are elements of order , and similarly we must have Sylow groups of order 3, thus the total number of elements is greater than 30, a contradiction.
We can now supply an alternative proof that is simple for :
Proposition: If and has more than one Sylow 5-subgroup then is simple.
Proof: Suppose and contains more than one Sylow 5-subgroup, but there exists a proper normal subgroup. Then note we must have exactly Sylow 5-subgroups. Let be such a group. Then the normalizer of has order 10 since its index is .
If then contains a Sylow -subgroup of and since is normal it contains all conjugates of this subgroup, hence hence we must have . But by the previous example, must have a unique Sylow 5-subgroup, a contradiction, thus 5 does not divide .
If is 6 or 12 then has a normal Sylow subgroup of order 2,3, or 4, which is also normal in , and we may replace by this. Hence or . Then by previous results, has a normal subgroup of order . Its preimage under the natural map is a normal subgroup whose order is a multiple of 5, which we have previously shown to be a contradiction.
Corollary: is simple.
Proof: The subgroups and are distinct Sylow 5-subgroups.
Theorem: is simple for all .
TODO: proof