We wish to show, for our first application, that
a cyclic group of order
can be written as a direct product
of cyclic groups of prime power order.
Proof:
We designate by
the unique cyclic
subgroup of order
of
(see Theorem
5.2.1) and let
.
is, of course a subgroup, since the
commute, because
is cyclic (and thus, of course,
abelian). Also
for every
;
therefore
,
for every
. Thus
(see Theorem 1.2.11,
generalized from
factors to
factors)
and so
. Since
,
and so
.
This proves
.
Next, we designate by
the cyclic subgroup of
of order
,
,
and let
.
Then
and also
.
Thus
and
,
but
, so
.
Hence
.
However,
for all
.
Thus
for
since
, being cyclic,
contains a subgroup of order
and that subgroup must
be
by uniqueness (see Theorem
5.2.1),
so
and therefore
We next prove an important property of direct products.
Proof: The theorem is an immediate consequence of the second isomorphism theorem (Theorem 8.3.7). Namely, we have
and since
and
are both normal in
,
Theorem 8.3.7 gives
and
.
We have already seen one instance (Theorem 8.1.5) in
which a normal subgroup
of a normal subgroup
of a group
is normal in
,
i.e.,
,
, and
.
The following theorem
gives another important case in which this true.
Proof:
Let
. Now by hypothesis,
.
Thus if
is an arbitrary element of
, then we can
write
in the form
, where
and
. Now
We continue with another application of direct products to cyclic groups.
Proof:
Suppose
. We shall show
that
is not cyclic. Let
be a prime such that
,
so
and
. Thus
has a cyclic subgroup of
order
and
has also a cyclic subgroup of order
(see
Theorem 5.2.1), but
.
Consequently,
has
at least two cyclic subgroups of order
. This implies,
by Theorem 5.2.1, that
is not cyclic.
Next suppose that
and let
and
.
Then
and
,
for if we let
, then
As our last application, we prove that the
Euler
-function is multiplicative, i.e., if
, then
.
Suppose
is a cyclic group of
order
, and
is a cyclic group of order
, where
. Then
,
is a cyclic group of order
by Theorem 9.2.4.
We know from our discussion
of cyclic groups in Chapter 5 (in particular see
Corollary 5.2.3) that
has
generators and
that
has
generators.
While
has
generators.
However, it is easy to see (see exercise 2 for this
section) that every generator of
must be of the
form
where
is a generator of
and
is a generator
of
. Thus we have proven the following result.