The structure theorem for finite abelian groups is most conveniently obtained in the context of studying finitely-generated modules over the ring of integers, or, more generally, over principal ideal domains.
On the other hand, the segment of this course on the topic of finite groups is hardly a complete introduction to that subject without at least mention of the structure theorem for finite abelian groups, and it is desirable to have a treatment that fits the context of this part of the course.
The method used here, explained to me by Professor Alexandre Tchernev, is based on analysis of the case of a finite abelian group of prime power order in the spirit of “Nakayama's Lemma” from the subject of commutative algebra.
The structure theorem for finite abelian groups is the following:
In view of the Chinese Remainder Theorem, i.e., this theorem is equivalent to the following:
The proof will proceed in stages.
Proof. If is a given finite abelian group, then each of its Sylow -subgroups must be normal in since every subgroup of an abelian group is normal. Since for a given prime all Sylow -subgroups are conjugate to each other, it follows that for each prime dividing the order of there is one and only one Sylow -subgroup . Since these subgroups are all normal the map given by , where for the distinct primes dividing , must be a group homomorphism. Since the orders of the groups are pairwise coprime, the homomorphism must be injective, and since the domain and target of both have the same number of elements, must, since injective, be bijective. Thus is isomorphic via to the direct product of its Sylow subgroups.
Example. The exponent of the symmetric group (which has order ) is . The largest order of any element in is .
Proof. In view of the preceding proposition the question reduces to the case of a finite abelian group having prime power order. In that case the statement is obvious.
To prove theorem 2 it suffices to prove that a finite group with order a power of , where is prime, is isomorphic to the direct product of cyclic groups. If is a finite abelian group of order , with group law written additively, then the set is a subgroup of , and will denote the quotient
Proof. If is non-trivial, then its exponent must be for some , and, clearly, the exponent of is then . Since and have different exponents, they cannot be equal.
Example. If are integers with for , then In this example note that if is a generator of the -th factor and , where is the quotient homomorphism from to , then generate . Moreover, is a vector space over the field , and is a basis of . Unfortunately, showing that a finite abelian group with order is isomorphic to a direct product of cyclic groups is a bit more complicated than finding a basis of as a vector space over .
Proof. Let be the subgroup of generated by , and let be the quotient homorphism. Let be the homomorphism obtained by following the quotient homomorphism with the quotient homomorphism . Clearly is contained in the kernel of , hence, by the universal mapping property for quotients one obtains a homomorphism . The image of is the same as the image of , and, therefore, is since is the composition of two surjective homomorphisms. The kernel of is the image under of the kernel of . The kernel of is the subgroup of generated by the set . Since , the kernel of is simply . But by hypothesis, and, therefore i.e., . Hence, , i.e., is generated by .
Proof. The first of these corollaries is obvious from what was previously shown. The second follows from the fact that any linearly independent set in a finite-dimensional vector space over a field is part of some basis of that vector space.
Example. For the group the set is a minimal generating set.
Proof. When is a minimal set of generators of with having order , it will always be assumed that the sequence is arranged in such a way that the orders increase, i.e., . Among all so-arranged minimal sets of generators of choose one for which the sequence of orders is lexicographically smallest. (Note that this is not the case for the particular minimal generating set in the example given above following corollary 9.) Define the group homomorphism by the formula Clearly, is surjective since generate . The proof of the proposition will have been obtained if it is shown that if and only if for . Clearly, the simultaneous congruences are sufficient for membership in the kernel. Suppose now that is in the kernel, but at least one of the coordinates does not satisfy the desired congruence. Suppose is the smallest such value of the index . Then and, therefore, Since are linearly independent over the field , it follows that for the indices with . Let be the highest power of dividing all of the integers , and let for . Let . By the choice of the exponent one has for some , . Since are linearly independent over , one finds that . Hence, the set is linearly independent, and, therefore, by corollary 9, may be completed to a basis of where . Since , one sees that , which is to say that the set -- which is a minimal generating set by proposition 7 -- is lexicographically smaller than contrary to the choice of .