Can you make the triviality of $langle a,b,c mid aba^{-1} = b^2, bcb^{-1} = c^2, cac^{-1} = a^2 rangle$ more...
I recently learned the following pleasant fact. (It was in the proof of Proposition 3.1 of this paper - but don't worry, there's no model theory in this question.)
Let $G$ be a group, and let $a,b,cin G$. If $aba^{-1} = b^2$, $bcb^{-1} = c^2$, and $cac^{-1} = a^2$, then $a = b = c = e$. Put another way, the group defined by generators and relations $langle a,b,c mid aba^{-1} = b^2, bcb^{-1} = c^2, cac^{-1} = a^2 rangle$ is the trivial group.
I came up with the following elementary, but ugly, proof:
The relations can be rewritten as (1) $ab = b^2a$, (2) $bc = c^2b$, (3) $ca = a^2c$.
Using (1), (2), and (3), we can rewrite $a^4bc = a^4c^2b = c^2ab = c^2b^2a$.
But we can also rewrite $a^4bc = b^{16}a^4c = b^{16}ca^2 = c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2$.
So $c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2 = c^2b^2a$. This implies $a = b^{-16}c^{2-2^{16}}b^2$.
Substituting for $a$ in (1) above, $b^{-16}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^3 = b^{-14}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^2$, and cancelling from both sides, $c^{2(1-2^{15})}b = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$.
But now by (2), we have $bc^{1-2^{15}} = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$, and $b = c^{2^{15}-1}$. But then $b$ and $c$ commute, so $bcb^{-1} = c^2$ implies $c = c^2$, and $c = e$. It then follows easily that $a = b = c = e$.
Question: Is there a better way to see this? i.e. a more abstract proof, or at least one that doesn't involve manipulating words of length $2^{16}$?
abstract-algebra group-theory group-presentation
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
|
show 2 more comments
I recently learned the following pleasant fact. (It was in the proof of Proposition 3.1 of this paper - but don't worry, there's no model theory in this question.)
Let $G$ be a group, and let $a,b,cin G$. If $aba^{-1} = b^2$, $bcb^{-1} = c^2$, and $cac^{-1} = a^2$, then $a = b = c = e$. Put another way, the group defined by generators and relations $langle a,b,c mid aba^{-1} = b^2, bcb^{-1} = c^2, cac^{-1} = a^2 rangle$ is the trivial group.
I came up with the following elementary, but ugly, proof:
The relations can be rewritten as (1) $ab = b^2a$, (2) $bc = c^2b$, (3) $ca = a^2c$.
Using (1), (2), and (3), we can rewrite $a^4bc = a^4c^2b = c^2ab = c^2b^2a$.
But we can also rewrite $a^4bc = b^{16}a^4c = b^{16}ca^2 = c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2$.
So $c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2 = c^2b^2a$. This implies $a = b^{-16}c^{2-2^{16}}b^2$.
Substituting for $a$ in (1) above, $b^{-16}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^3 = b^{-14}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^2$, and cancelling from both sides, $c^{2(1-2^{15})}b = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$.
But now by (2), we have $bc^{1-2^{15}} = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$, and $b = c^{2^{15}-1}$. But then $b$ and $c$ commute, so $bcb^{-1} = c^2$ implies $c = c^2$, and $c = e$. It then follows easily that $a = b = c = e$.
Question: Is there a better way to see this? i.e. a more abstract proof, or at least one that doesn't involve manipulating words of length $2^{16}$?
abstract-algebra group-theory group-presentation
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
5
A slightly relevant remark, if there are four generators with similar relations, the group will be infinite. That is, $⟨a,b,c,d∣aba^{−1}=b^2, bcb^{−1}=c^2,cdc^{−1}=d^2, dad^{−1}=a^2⟩$ is not finite. c.f. Serre's Trees Page 9.
– userabc
Jan 4 at 5:02
1
@userabc Thanks for the comment - this is actually the very next remark in the paper I linked to. But the authors just call it a "well-known fact", so it's nice to have the reference to Serre's book. And I see that my question is Exercise 1) on p. 10 of Trees.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:14
1
... and now that I can search for an exercise number in a well-known book, I find that there are a number of questions on this site about the same group. For example, Jim Belk gave almost an identical proof to the one I found here, and Martin Brandenburg asked essentially the same question I'm asking here. Together, this evidence makes me think that there's unlikely to be a nicer proof. It would be reasonable to close this question as a duplicate.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:26
There is another proof here.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 8:58
3
Once you have proved that $a in langle b,c rangle$, you can use the more conceptual argument given by Bhaskar Vashishth in the linked proof, that $G$ is perfect, but $G = langle b,c rangle$ is solvable, so $G$ is trivial.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 15:05
|
show 2 more comments
I recently learned the following pleasant fact. (It was in the proof of Proposition 3.1 of this paper - but don't worry, there's no model theory in this question.)
Let $G$ be a group, and let $a,b,cin G$. If $aba^{-1} = b^2$, $bcb^{-1} = c^2$, and $cac^{-1} = a^2$, then $a = b = c = e$. Put another way, the group defined by generators and relations $langle a,b,c mid aba^{-1} = b^2, bcb^{-1} = c^2, cac^{-1} = a^2 rangle$ is the trivial group.
I came up with the following elementary, but ugly, proof:
The relations can be rewritten as (1) $ab = b^2a$, (2) $bc = c^2b$, (3) $ca = a^2c$.
Using (1), (2), and (3), we can rewrite $a^4bc = a^4c^2b = c^2ab = c^2b^2a$.
But we can also rewrite $a^4bc = b^{16}a^4c = b^{16}ca^2 = c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2$.
So $c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2 = c^2b^2a$. This implies $a = b^{-16}c^{2-2^{16}}b^2$.
Substituting for $a$ in (1) above, $b^{-16}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^3 = b^{-14}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^2$, and cancelling from both sides, $c^{2(1-2^{15})}b = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$.
But now by (2), we have $bc^{1-2^{15}} = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$, and $b = c^{2^{15}-1}$. But then $b$ and $c$ commute, so $bcb^{-1} = c^2$ implies $c = c^2$, and $c = e$. It then follows easily that $a = b = c = e$.
Question: Is there a better way to see this? i.e. a more abstract proof, or at least one that doesn't involve manipulating words of length $2^{16}$?
abstract-algebra group-theory group-presentation
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
I recently learned the following pleasant fact. (It was in the proof of Proposition 3.1 of this paper - but don't worry, there's no model theory in this question.)
Let $G$ be a group, and let $a,b,cin G$. If $aba^{-1} = b^2$, $bcb^{-1} = c^2$, and $cac^{-1} = a^2$, then $a = b = c = e$. Put another way, the group defined by generators and relations $langle a,b,c mid aba^{-1} = b^2, bcb^{-1} = c^2, cac^{-1} = a^2 rangle$ is the trivial group.
I came up with the following elementary, but ugly, proof:
The relations can be rewritten as (1) $ab = b^2a$, (2) $bc = c^2b$, (3) $ca = a^2c$.
Using (1), (2), and (3), we can rewrite $a^4bc = a^4c^2b = c^2ab = c^2b^2a$.
But we can also rewrite $a^4bc = b^{16}a^4c = b^{16}ca^2 = c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2$.
So $c^{2^{16}}b^{16}a^2 = c^2b^2a$. This implies $a = b^{-16}c^{2-2^{16}}b^2$.
Substituting for $a$ in (1) above, $b^{-16}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^3 = b^{-14}c^{2(1-2^{15})}b^2$, and cancelling from both sides, $c^{2(1-2^{15})}b = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$.
But now by (2), we have $bc^{1-2^{15}} = b^{2}c^{2(1-2^{15})}$, and $b = c^{2^{15}-1}$. But then $b$ and $c$ commute, so $bcb^{-1} = c^2$ implies $c = c^2$, and $c = e$. It then follows easily that $a = b = c = e$.
Question: Is there a better way to see this? i.e. a more abstract proof, or at least one that doesn't involve manipulating words of length $2^{16}$?
abstract-algebra group-theory group-presentation
abstract-algebra group-theory group-presentation
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
edited Jan 4 at 6:14
Shaun
8,820113681
8,820113681
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
asked Jan 4 at 4:13
Alex KruckmanAlex Kruckman
26.7k22556
26.7k22556
5
A slightly relevant remark, if there are four generators with similar relations, the group will be infinite. That is, $⟨a,b,c,d∣aba^{−1}=b^2, bcb^{−1}=c^2,cdc^{−1}=d^2, dad^{−1}=a^2⟩$ is not finite. c.f. Serre's Trees Page 9.
– userabc
Jan 4 at 5:02
1
@userabc Thanks for the comment - this is actually the very next remark in the paper I linked to. But the authors just call it a "well-known fact", so it's nice to have the reference to Serre's book. And I see that my question is Exercise 1) on p. 10 of Trees.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:14
1
... and now that I can search for an exercise number in a well-known book, I find that there are a number of questions on this site about the same group. For example, Jim Belk gave almost an identical proof to the one I found here, and Martin Brandenburg asked essentially the same question I'm asking here. Together, this evidence makes me think that there's unlikely to be a nicer proof. It would be reasonable to close this question as a duplicate.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:26
There is another proof here.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 8:58
3
Once you have proved that $a in langle b,c rangle$, you can use the more conceptual argument given by Bhaskar Vashishth in the linked proof, that $G$ is perfect, but $G = langle b,c rangle$ is solvable, so $G$ is trivial.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 15:05
|
show 2 more comments
5
A slightly relevant remark, if there are four generators with similar relations, the group will be infinite. That is, $⟨a,b,c,d∣aba^{−1}=b^2, bcb^{−1}=c^2,cdc^{−1}=d^2, dad^{−1}=a^2⟩$ is not finite. c.f. Serre's Trees Page 9.
– userabc
Jan 4 at 5:02
1
@userabc Thanks for the comment - this is actually the very next remark in the paper I linked to. But the authors just call it a "well-known fact", so it's nice to have the reference to Serre's book. And I see that my question is Exercise 1) on p. 10 of Trees.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:14
1
... and now that I can search for an exercise number in a well-known book, I find that there are a number of questions on this site about the same group. For example, Jim Belk gave almost an identical proof to the one I found here, and Martin Brandenburg asked essentially the same question I'm asking here. Together, this evidence makes me think that there's unlikely to be a nicer proof. It would be reasonable to close this question as a duplicate.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:26
There is another proof here.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 8:58
3
Once you have proved that $a in langle b,c rangle$, you can use the more conceptual argument given by Bhaskar Vashishth in the linked proof, that $G$ is perfect, but $G = langle b,c rangle$ is solvable, so $G$ is trivial.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 15:05
5
5
A slightly relevant remark, if there are four generators with similar relations, the group will be infinite. That is, $⟨a,b,c,d∣aba^{−1}=b^2, bcb^{−1}=c^2,cdc^{−1}=d^2, dad^{−1}=a^2⟩$ is not finite. c.f. Serre's Trees Page 9.
– userabc
Jan 4 at 5:02
A slightly relevant remark, if there are four generators with similar relations, the group will be infinite. That is, $⟨a,b,c,d∣aba^{−1}=b^2, bcb^{−1}=c^2,cdc^{−1}=d^2, dad^{−1}=a^2⟩$ is not finite. c.f. Serre's Trees Page 9.
– userabc
Jan 4 at 5:02
1
1
@userabc Thanks for the comment - this is actually the very next remark in the paper I linked to. But the authors just call it a "well-known fact", so it's nice to have the reference to Serre's book. And I see that my question is Exercise 1) on p. 10 of Trees.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:14
@userabc Thanks for the comment - this is actually the very next remark in the paper I linked to. But the authors just call it a "well-known fact", so it's nice to have the reference to Serre's book. And I see that my question is Exercise 1) on p. 10 of Trees.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:14
1
1
... and now that I can search for an exercise number in a well-known book, I find that there are a number of questions on this site about the same group. For example, Jim Belk gave almost an identical proof to the one I found here, and Martin Brandenburg asked essentially the same question I'm asking here. Together, this evidence makes me think that there's unlikely to be a nicer proof. It would be reasonable to close this question as a duplicate.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:26
... and now that I can search for an exercise number in a well-known book, I find that there are a number of questions on this site about the same group. For example, Jim Belk gave almost an identical proof to the one I found here, and Martin Brandenburg asked essentially the same question I'm asking here. Together, this evidence makes me think that there's unlikely to be a nicer proof. It would be reasonable to close this question as a duplicate.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:26
There is another proof here.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 8:58
There is another proof here.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 8:58
3
3
Once you have proved that $a in langle b,c rangle$, you can use the more conceptual argument given by Bhaskar Vashishth in the linked proof, that $G$ is perfect, but $G = langle b,c rangle$ is solvable, so $G$ is trivial.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 15:05
Once you have proved that $a in langle b,c rangle$, you can use the more conceptual argument given by Bhaskar Vashishth in the linked proof, that $G$ is perfect, but $G = langle b,c rangle$ is solvable, so $G$ is trivial.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 15:05
|
show 2 more comments
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061315%2fcan-you-make-the-triviality-of-langle-a-b-c-mid-aba-1-b2-bcb-1-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3061315%2fcan-you-make-the-triviality-of-langle-a-b-c-mid-aba-1-b2-bcb-1-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
5
A slightly relevant remark, if there are four generators with similar relations, the group will be infinite. That is, $⟨a,b,c,d∣aba^{−1}=b^2, bcb^{−1}=c^2,cdc^{−1}=d^2, dad^{−1}=a^2⟩$ is not finite. c.f. Serre's Trees Page 9.
– userabc
Jan 4 at 5:02
1
@userabc Thanks for the comment - this is actually the very next remark in the paper I linked to. But the authors just call it a "well-known fact", so it's nice to have the reference to Serre's book. And I see that my question is Exercise 1) on p. 10 of Trees.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:14
1
... and now that I can search for an exercise number in a well-known book, I find that there are a number of questions on this site about the same group. For example, Jim Belk gave almost an identical proof to the one I found here, and Martin Brandenburg asked essentially the same question I'm asking here. Together, this evidence makes me think that there's unlikely to be a nicer proof. It would be reasonable to close this question as a duplicate.
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 4 at 5:26
There is another proof here.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 8:58
3
Once you have proved that $a in langle b,c rangle$, you can use the more conceptual argument given by Bhaskar Vashishth in the linked proof, that $G$ is perfect, but $G = langle b,c rangle$ is solvable, so $G$ is trivial.
– Derek Holt
Jan 4 at 15:05