Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science connection constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry goodwillie-calculus graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory history homological homological-algebra homology homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nonassociative noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics planar pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2018

    polished layout, added example of 2I2I

    diff, v2, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2018

    Added example of SL n(F)SL_n(F), and that quotients of perfect groups are perfect.

    diff, v3, current

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2018
    • (edited Oct 27th 2018)

    made explicit that the class of examples SL n(𝔽)SL_n(\mathbb{F}) generalizes the example 2ISL 2(𝔽 5)2I \simeq SL_2(\mathbb{F}_5)

    What’s a good reference to cite for all these facts and examples?

    diff, v4, current

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2018

    Added two references for the SL nSL_n proposition, and another proposition that perfect groups are closed under colimits in GrpGrp.

    diff, v5, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2018

    Hm, something that seems kind of cool is the coincidence A 5SL 2(𝔽 2 2)A_5 \cong SL_2(\mathbb{F}_{2^2}) (the latter group is of order (4 21)(4 24)/(41)=60(4^2 - 1)(4^2 - 4)/(4-1) = 60). I haven’t looked at this carefully, but it must follow from the statement that there is a unique perfect group of order 6060.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2018

    Put in the correct theorem numbers from Lang’s Algebra. He proves that (except for the case n=2n=2 and F=/(2)F = \mathbb{Z}/(2) or /(3)\mathbb{Z}/(3)) the group SL n(F)SL_n(F) is not only perfect but also that PSL n(F)PSL_n(F) is simple. For the case PSL 2(𝔽 4)=SL 2(𝔽 4)/±IPSL_2(\mathbb{F}_4) = SL_2(\mathbb{F}_4)/\pm I, this does not mean there’s a simple group of order 3030, because in fact 1=11 = -1 in 𝔽 4\mathbb{F}_4!!

    diff, v6, current

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 28th 2018

    Thanks! I have made more formal pointer to the refernces. And copied over the statement of perfection of SL nSL_n over fields to special linear group.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 28th 2018

    Gave a simple argument for why SL 2(𝔽 4)SL_2(\mathbb{F}_4) is “the” simple group of order 6060 (“the” in parentheses since there are nontrivial automorphisms); this and not SL 2(𝔽 5)SL_2(\mathbb{F}_5) is the smallest example from the SLSL class.

    Another thing one can say is that finite cartesian products of perfect groups and infinite direct sums of perfect groups are perfect. (In both cases the argument is very simple.) But I don’t know what one can say for infinite cartesian products – I wasn’t able to google my way to an answer.

    diff, v9, current

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)