Now we return to the case of
, a cyclic group.
Clearly,
. If
is finite, then of
course
must be finite, say
.
Then recalling our discussion of elements of finite order (see
Property 10 from Chapter 2),
Next, let
and
be two infinite cyclic groups. Consider the mapping
given by
(
).
This mapping is well-defined since
is an
infinite cyclic group generated by
(all powers
of
are distinct since
is infinite)
and f is onto
. Also,
so
preserves the operation. Finally if
then
.
Since
is infinite cyclic, generated by
,
however, this implies
; hence
.
Thus
is an
isomorphism mapping
onto
and so
.
We have shown that any two infinite cyclic groups are isomorphic.
We note that since
, the additive group
of integers, is infinite cyclic generated by
, we
have proven
any infinite cyclic group is isomorphic to
.
Next suppose that
and
are finite
cyclic groups such that
.
Then
,
and
.
Define again by
. To show that
is well-defined,
we note that if
, with
say,
then
and
therefore
(again see Property
10 Chapter 2). Therefore
, since
, and
. Thus
is
well-defined. The rest of the justification needed to show
is an isomorphism of
ontp
is left as an exercise
(see exercise 1 for this section). Hence
.
This shows that
any finite cyclic group of order
is isomorphic to
(see Example 5.1.4).
As our next consideration, we wish to determine the
subgroups of a cyclic group. Suppose that
is a cyclic group and let
be any subgroup of
.
Let
be the smallest positive
integer such that
; such
a
exists because
must contain
at least one positive power of
.
For if
and
then either
or
. If
, we have a positive power
of
in
, i.e.,
.
If
, then
and again we have
a positive power of
in
, i.e.,
.
We claim that
.
For suppose that
. Then
for some
integer
since
. By the
Division Algorithm,
,
.
Then
and since
.
This implies by the minimality of
, that
and
. So
, i.e.,
.
Therefore we have shown that any subgroup of a cyclic
group is also cyclic.
Now suppose that
is an infinite cyclic group.
We claim that
has infinitely many subgroups.
If
is any positive integer, then
.
Let
be positive integers.
If
then we could write
for some
and and
for some
. Hence
.
But
, thus
, and
. Again since
has infinite order
and since
and
are
positive, we must have
. The only way to
avoid this contradiction is to conclude that
the hypothesis
is
false. In other words, we have shown that if
then
.
This proves the claim.
Suppose next that
,
and
. If
is a
subgroup, then we know,
, where
is the
smallest positive integer such that
.
We claim that in
this case
. For
, so
by our earlier
argument on the minimality of
(in the paragraph above where we showed any subgroup of a cyclic
group is also cyclic). Conversely if
is a
positive integer such that
, then
. Moreover if
and
are positive integers such that
and
and
then
.
For otherwise (i.e., assume instead that
),
we must have
and
.
Thus
, but
so
,
so
. Similarly
and so since
we must have
, a contradiction.
Summarizing, we see that for a
finite cyclic group
,
with
, then any subgroup
of
is of
the form
, where
and
.
Moreover, for each
positive
dividing
, there is such a subgroup. Also distinct
divisors determine distinct subgroups. Finally since
for a positive divisor
of
one has
if and only if
if and only
if
, we conclude from Property 10
that
,
as
runs through the positive divisors of
.
Of course, if
goes through all the positive
divisors of
, so does
. Also note that the trivial subgroup
. Thus in the case of cyclic groups of finite
order, the converse of Lagrange's theorem is true, viz,
for each
,
, there exists a (cyclic)
subgroup of order
. Moreover, in this case there is precisely one
such subgroup (see exercise 2 for this section).
The converse of Lagrange's Theorem is not true in
general, i.e., if
and
,
, there need not
exist a subgroup of order
. The smallest example
is the group
of order
; it turns out that
has no subgroup of order
.
This will be left as an exercise (see exercise 4 for
section 6.2) after more tools are
developed to handle it efficiently. We
shall meet further instances of this and will point
it out for specific cases
later. We point out now that it was no accident
that the divisor was taken to be composite, i.e., not a prime,
for prime divisors or for prime power divisors for
that matter, there must exist subgroups of such orders.
These matters will be attended to when we discuss the Sylow theorems.
Let us now summarize our results for cyclic groups.
We shall see presently that (e) really characterizes finite cyclic groups, but first we establish an extremely useful theorem, which will be used many times. L
Proof:
Let
.
Then
which implies that
(see Property 10 of elementary properties
of groups, in chapter 2).
Now write (see Corollary 1.2.7)
We apply the theorem immediately to the case of
a finite cyclic group
of order
.
Let
.
By the theorem
.
Thus
(and
is consequently
also a generator of
) if and only if
. In other words, if
is a cyclic group
of order
, then
has
generators,
where
is the Euler
-function.
Summarizing,
we have the following result.
Using the same notation as before, for
a cyclic group
with
, let us see which elements,
, of
are of order
. Again by Theorem 5.2.4,
if and only if
.
Thus
. In which case, we
can write
,
,
where
.
Thus the elements of order
are those of the form
, where
.
and
since
.
There are then, of course,
elements of order
. Since
, we have
We shall make use of (5.1) directly in the following theorem. The author is indebted to W. Wardlaw for pointing this theorem out to him. (Also see [R].)
Proof:
For each
,
, let
= the number of
elements of
of order
. Then
Proof:
The hypothesis clearly implies that
can
have at most one cyclic subgroup of order
since all
elements of such a subgroup satisfy the equation.
So Theorem 5.2.4 applies to give our result.
We have given a few applications along the way in
this section and the preceding one of some of our
results to number theory. We end this chapter with
one further application. In particular, we claim that
Theorem 4.3.6 is a generalization of Theorem 1.2.11,
i.e.,
.
Let us see how this result
follows from Theorem 4.3.6. We shall apply the theorem
to the case where
is a cyclic group of finite
order. This frequently, as we shall see in other
instances, yields a number theoretic result as a special case of
a group theoretical result. Let
,
be arbitrary
positive integers. Choose a positive integer
such that
and
.
Then take
with
. Let
and
. Then from
Theorem 5.2.2,
, and
.
It is not difficult to show (see exercise 3 for this section) that