Is there a group G such that Aut(G) = $C_3$? What if we replace 3 with a prime number p?
-
2Dear Greg, your question is a common homework problem in a 1st course on group theory, and not appropriate for MO. – Ryan Budney Nov 05 '10 at 16:04
-
1I agree with Ryan and voted to close. Most probably it is a homework question. Anybody who knows the definition of Aut and Inn should be able to answer it. – Nov 05 '10 at 16:08
-
2I personally felt this was closed too abruptly. Seeing that the OP possesses a PhD in mathematics, it is probably not a homework question. I would have voted to re-open at meta, except for some reason I'm unable to sign in. As far as I can tell, while the problem is not hard, it's not a complete triviality either. I have in the meantime mailed the OP my own solution. – Todd Trimble Nov 06 '10 at 04:26
-
Sorry about the problems at meta: my hosting company has had some downtime. – Scott Morrison Nov 06 '10 at 10:57
-
1I've just cast the last reopen vote. I would urge the questioner to add some motivation: what led you to ask this question, why are you interested in replacing 3 by an arbitrary prime? Is that extra just a casual add-on or is it something you're really interested in in your research? – Andrew Stacey Nov 06 '10 at 12:40
-
This is rather a question, then a comment. I am completey illiteral in group theory. Is there any general characterization of (say, finite) automorphisms groups? That is, given a group, how to see wther its equals $Aut(G)$ for some $G$ or no such $G$ exists? – Fedor Petrov Nov 06 '10 at 15:12
-
4The question was more curiosity since I've had the chance to play with gap recently. It just occurred to me that although many of the small groups also appear as automorphism groups, C3 never seemed to. As others have clearly indicated, the idea that p be prime is not necessary, only that p be odd. Although my dissertation was in Lie algebras I've since retrained and switched to modeling biological systems, something a number of people here do. Having not had the chance to teach abstract algebra even at the undergraduate level, I've not seen group theory in 15 years. – Greg Gibson Nov 07 '10 at 19:14
2 Answers
The original question has already been answered, but Jared Weinstein asked in a comment about what happens if we don't assume the axiom of choice. I've convinced myself that it's consistent with ZF to have a vector space over $\mathbb{F}_2$ with automorphism group $C_3$. In case any set theorists (other than me) are looking at this question, here's the model I have in mind. (It's a permutation model, using atoms, but the Jech-Sochor theorem suffices to convert it into a ZF-model.) Start with the full universe $V$ built from a countable set $A$ of atoms (and satisfying AC). In $V$, give $A$ the structure of a $\mathbb{F}_4$-vector space, obviously of dimension $\aleph_0$. (The relevance of the 4-element field $\mathbb{F}_4$ is that the two elements that are not in the 2-element subfield are cube roots of 1, so multiplication by either of them gives an automorphism of order 3.) Let $G$ be the group of automorphisms of this vector space, and let $M$ be the Fraenkel-Mostowski-Specker permutation submodel of $V$ determined by the group $G$ with finite subsets of $A$ as supports. In $M$, $A$ is an $\mathbb{F}_4$-vector-space. Multiplication by the elements of $\mathbb{F}_4\setminus\mathbb{F}_2$ gives a $C_3$-action on the underlying abelian group. Fairly easy calculations (admittedly not yet written down) convince me that this abelian group has no automorphisms in $M$ beyond this copy of $C_3$.

- 72,290
-
Thanks! This is a good example where I see an advantage to the strategy you suggest (a permutation model, and then the Jech-Sochor embedding), than directly using a symmetric model or something like that. – Andrés E. Caicedo Nov 08 '10 at 00:49
-
I'll second those thanks. So the trivial homework problem can't be settled within ZF, and involves something more than just playing with definitions of Aut and Inn. Learn something new every day. – Todd Trimble Nov 08 '10 at 14:13
-
@Todd: Indeed, there's something more involved, something that depends on the axiom of choice, but in this case the relevant "something" is only that vector spaces have bases, and that permutations of a basis induce automorphisms of the vector space. – Andreas Blass Nov 08 '10 at 16:30
-
@Andreas: I know that; indeed I wrote that in my answer before I revised it. I'm really referring back to one of Mark's comments which I take issue with. – Todd Trimble Nov 08 '10 at 17:49
There is no group $G$ (finite or infinite) for which $Aut(G) \cong C_p$ (the cyclic group of order $p$), if $p > 1$ is an odd number.
Suppose otherwise. The inner automorphism group $Inn(G)$ is a subgroup, also cyclic, and a well-known exercise in group theory is that if $Inn(G) \cong G/Z(G)$ is cyclic, then $G$ is abelian.
An abelian group $G$ has an involution given by inversion. Unless inversion is trivial, we get an element of order 2 in $Aut(G) = C_p$, contradiction.
If inversion is trivial, then the abelian group $G$ becomes a vector space over $\mathbb{F}_2$. In that case it is an easy to prove that either $Aut(G)$ is trivial or has an element of order 2; either way we get a contradiction.
Edit: After listening to some comments about this at meta, I amended my answer so that it gives less away or leaves a bit more to the imagination, or so I hope.

- 52,336
-
2I agree with Ryan here. You have just written up a solution to a well-known algebra exercise, which now many students will copy ... – Martin Brandenburg Nov 06 '10 at 13:33
-
More generally, the possible cyclic automorphsim groups are those of order 1,2 or $(p-1)p^k$ for an odd prime $p$. – BS. Nov 06 '10 at 13:40
-
2@Martin: Can you give me a reference for this "well-known exercise"? My understanding is that the well-known exercise is to show that the inner automorphism group Inn(G) is cyclic only if G is abelian. I wasn't aware that OP's question as stated was a well-known exercise. (And please, don't get bent out of shape over this. If it's that important to you, I can edit out the part where I write up what I think is the well-known exercise.) – Todd Trimble Nov 06 '10 at 14:20
-
(And I mean hell, so if you tell OP to run along now and go to stackex, then the question will probably be answered there and still available for all to see!) – Todd Trimble Nov 06 '10 at 14:38
-
Are there any infinite (necessarily non-torsion and non-finitely-generated) abelian groups G other than Z such that Aut(G) is cyclic (necessarily of even order)? – Tom Goodwillie Nov 06 '10 at 15:23
-
13I can't see what's wrong with reading other people's proofs. I do that all the time. – Franz Lemmermeyer Nov 06 '10 at 15:57
-
Do the p-adic integers work? I'm not sure; I'd have to ruminate on it further. – Todd Trimble Nov 06 '10 at 16:01
-
-
6This proof isn't that elementary, because the axiom of choice is invoked! Is it consistent with ZF that there exists a vector space over F_2 admitting no nontrivial involutions? Worse yet, is it consistent with ZF that there exists a vector space V over F_2 with Aut(V) = C_3?? – Jared Weinstein Nov 06 '10 at 18:47
-
I indeed did not realize that OP has a PhD. I give similar problems for homework every time I teach the graduate algebra class. The reduction to Abelian case is straightforward, and the Abelian case is trivial as well. @Jared, sorry, in my classes the AC is considered true, and all vector spaces have bases (I do not want to confuse my students more than is necessary). But your question about consistency $Aut(V)=C_3$ with ZF is very interesting indeed. – Nov 06 '10 at 19:06
-
2At this point it looks as though people are beginning to admit that there could be more to it than just the definitions of Aut and Inn, protests of "triviality" notwithstanding. Interesting... – Todd Trimble Nov 06 '10 at 19:31
-
-
6Perhaps the MO rule should be, undergraduate homework no, graduate homework yes? Outside our own specialties, we are all at the level of graduate students. – Gerry Myerson Nov 06 '10 at 21:50
-
3@Gerry: that's pretty close to how I feel. There are some problems in Hartshorne that I never figured out. @Mark: sigh. Unless there's another way, one has to hit upon the idea of using inversion, there is the reformulation in terms of vector spaces, there is AC. Perhaps it all seems very trivial to you. It may not be trivial for everyone. – Todd Trimble Nov 06 '10 at 22:12
-
@Gerry: It is not good to allow any homework problems on MO. It could be that a research problem of one person is a homework problem of another. But these should be the only exceptions. Fortunately such cases are rare. – Nov 06 '10 at 22:32
-
9I agree with Gerry Myerson that outside of our own specialties, our knowledge level is the same as that of graduate students: slightly familiar with the terminology, but unsure of its applications. I actually have considered this to be the raison d'etre for Math-Overflow $-$ what may appear to be a tall hard-to-climb-over step or fence from the point of view of one mathematical or scientific specialty may be similar or equivalent in another specialty to a very easy problem with a well-known canonical solution. Asking here allows us to let other experts help us when we're stalled. :) – sleepless in beantown Nov 07 '10 at 05:45
-
2@Todd-Trimble, thanks for answering this question. (from someone who hasn't been a student paying tuition since the previous century). If it's possible for mathematics grad students to cheat because of the existence of this, well shame on them. They'd just be cheating themselves out of the brainwork and mental exercise they'll need to perform for the rest of their mathematical careers if they copy instead of thinking for themselves. Your answer showed me something that was non-trivial for me, and I learned a little something that way. – sleepless in beantown Nov 07 '10 at 05:51
-
Considering the group, in the infinite Abelian case, to be a vector space over the field $Z_{2}$ may be a well known approach, also used to show that only {e} and $C_{2}$ have trivial automorphism groups, but being well known does not make it trivial. How many students in a first graduate level course in group theory would think of this? – Greg Gibson Nov 07 '10 at 19:39
-
2Greg: good question. There may be another angle from which to solve the problem, but this is the angle that I thought of. Perhaps Mark would be able to tell us how it very easily follows from the definition of Aut and Inn. – Todd Trimble Nov 07 '10 at 20:38