Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: statement and hint of problem 16E #261

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 12, 2025

Conversation

jfab20
Copy link
Contributor

@jfab20 jfab20 commented Jan 8, 2025

First of all added the condition for $n \ge 2$ so that there is a prime that divides $|G|$.

More importantly, I think there is a mistake on the hint. You say that you should consider $G$ acting on the left cosets of $H$. This is one of possible solutions, but I don't think you meant that one, because the solutions in which you consider $G$ as the group that acts on cosets, you conclude by getting a morfism from $G$ to $S_p$ and do something with factorias. You also consider the orbit of $H$ for some reason and apply the orbit stabilizer theorem to deduce something about its orbit, but you obviously don't need this because the orbit of $H$ under this particular action gives you all of the cosets (to get $g H$ just multiply by $g$). Finally, in the solution you provided, the group that acts on cosets is $H$, so you probably got confused while writing the solution.

So basically, I added $n \ge 2$ for the order of $G$, changed the hint to "Let $H$ act on left cosets" and then more or less indicated the path of the solution from there. The point is that you use the orbit stabilizer theorem on all orbits to show that either there is only one orbit or all orbits have size 1. Since the first case cannot happen (because the orbit of $H$ is ${H}$ which is not all the cosets) then all orbits must have size 1 and thus $h g H = g H$ for all $h \in H$ and $g \in G$, which implies that $H$ is normal.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 8, 2025

Hey there and thank you for opening this pull request! 👋

We require pull request titles to follow the Conventional Commits specification. This comment indicates a fix is needed to repair this.

How do I fix this?

For most of you, this means that the PR title should say either

  • fix: [short description here] (if you are fixing an issue)
  • feat: [short description here] (if you are introducing a new feature)

depending on whether you are fixing an issue or doing something new, respectively. But some other types might be suitable too, see the list below:

  • build: build related
  • ci: work related to CI
  • chore: updating deps, etc.
  • docs: documentation changes
  • drop: deleting stuff or removing a feature
  • edit: minor changes that don't constitute a new feature
  • perf: performance improvements
  • polish: copy editing or cleanup that doesn't affect functionality
  • refactor: major rewriting or restructuring that doesn't fix bugs or affect functionality
  • revert: revert commits
  • style: code style changes
  • test: unit testing, etc.

Please adjust the proposed title and this check will resolve automatically!

Detailed error message

No release type found in pull request title "fix statement and hint of problem 16E". Add a prefix to indicate what kind of release this pull request corresponds to. For reference, see https://www.conventionalcommits.org/

Available types:

  • fix
  • feat
  • build
  • ci
  • chore
  • docs
  • drop
  • edit
  • perf
  • polish
  • refactor
  • revert
  • style
  • test

@jfab20 jfab20 changed the title changed statement and hint of problem 16E fix: changed statement and hint of problem 16E Jan 8, 2025
@jfab20 jfab20 changed the title fix: changed statement and hint of problem 16E fix changed statement and hint of problem 16E Jan 8, 2025
@jfab20 jfab20 changed the title fix changed statement and hint of problem 16E fix statement and hint of problem 16E Jan 8, 2025
@jfab20 jfab20 changed the title fix statement and hint of problem 16E fix: statement and hint of problem 16E Jan 8, 2025
@vEnhance vEnhance merged commit 36ca9f5 into vEnhance:main Jan 12, 2025
5 of 8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants