HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

In
mathematics Mathematics is an area of knowledge that includes the topics of numbers, formulas and related structures, shapes and the spaces in which they are contained, and quantities and their changes. These topics are represented in modern mathematics ...
, in the realm of group theory, a countable group is said to be SQ-universal if every countable group can be embedded in one of its quotient groups. SQ-universality can be thought of as a measure of largeness or complexity of a group.


History

Many classic results of combinatorial group theory, going back to 1949, are now interpreted as saying that a particular group or class of groups is (are) SQ-universal. However the first explicit use of the term seems to be in an address given by Peter Neumann t
The London Algebra Colloquium
entitled "SQ-universal groups" on 23 May 1968.


Examples of SQ-universal groups

In 1949 Graham Higman, Bernhard Neumann and
Hanna Neumann Johanna (Hanna) Neumann (née von Caemmerer; 12 February 1914 – 14 November 1971) was a German-born mathematician who worked on group theory. Biography Neumann was born on 12 February 1914 in Lankwitz, Steglitz-Zehlendorf (today a distric ...
proved that every countable group can be embedded in a two-generator group. Using the contemporary language of SQ-universality, this result says that ''F''2, the free group (non-
abelian Abelian may refer to: Mathematics Group theory * Abelian group, a group in which the binary operation is commutative ** Category of abelian groups (Ab), has abelian groups as objects and group homomorphisms as morphisms * Metabelian group, a grou ...
) on two generators, is SQ-universal. This is the first known example of an SQ-universal group. Many more examples are now known: *Adding two
generator Generator may refer to: * Signal generator, electronic devices that generate repeating or non-repeating electronic signals * Electric generator, a device that converts mechanical energy to electrical energy. * Generator (circuit theory), an eleme ...
s and one arbitrary
relator In mathematics, a presentation is one method of specifying a group. A presentation of a group ''G'' comprises a set ''S'' of generators—so that every element of the group can be written as a product of powers of some of these generators—and ...
to a nontrivial torsion-free group, always results in an SQ-universal group. *Any non-elementary group that is hyperbolic with respect to a collection of proper subgroups is SQ-universal. *Many
HNN extension In mathematics, the HNN extension is an important construction of combinatorial group theory. Introduced in a 1949 paper ''Embedding Theorems for Groups'' by Graham Higman, Bernhard Neumann, and Hanna Neumann, it embeds a given group ''G'' into an ...
s, free products and free products with amalgamation. *The four-generator Coxeter group with presentation: :P=\left\langle a,b,c,d\,, \, a^=b^=c^=d^=(ab)^=(bc)^=(ac)^=(ad)^=(cd)^=(bd)^=1\right\rangle *Charles F. Miller III's example of a finitely presented SQ-universal group all of whose non-trivial quotients have unsolvable word problem. In addition much stronger versions of the Higmann-Neumann-Neumann theorem are now known. Ould Houcine has proved: : For every countable group ''G'' there exists a 2-generator SQ-universal group ''H'' such that ''G'' can be embedded in every non-trivial quotient of ''H''.


Some elementary properties of SQ-universal groups

A free group on countably many generators ''h''1, ''h''2, ..., ''hn'', ... , say, must be embeddable in a quotient of an SQ-universal group ''G''. If h^*_1,h^*_2, \dots ,h^*_n \dots \in G are chosen such that h^*_n \mapsto h_n for all ''n'', then they must freely generate a free subgroup of ''G''. Hence: :Every SQ-universal group has as a subgroup, a free group on countably many generators. Since every countable group can be embedded in a countable simple group, it is often sufficient to consider embeddings of simple groups. This observation allows us to easily prove some elementary results about SQ-universal groups, for instance: :If ''G'' is an SQ-universal group and ''N'' is a
normal subgroup In abstract algebra, a normal subgroup (also known as an invariant subgroup or self-conjugate subgroup) is a subgroup that is invariant under conjugation by members of the group of which it is a part. In other words, a subgroup N of the group G i ...
of ''G'' (i.e. N\triangleleft G) then either ''N'' is SQ-universal or the
quotient group A quotient group or factor group is a mathematical group obtained by aggregating similar elements of a larger group using an equivalence relation that preserves some of the group structure (the rest of the structure is "factored" out). For examp ...
''G''/''N'' is SQ-universal. To prove this suppose ''N'' is not SQ-universal, then there is a countable group ''K'' that cannot be embedded into a quotient group of ''N''. Let ''H'' be any countable group, then the
direct product In mathematics, one can often define a direct product of objects already known, giving a new one. This generalizes the Cartesian product of the underlying sets, together with a suitably defined structure on the product set. More abstractly, one ta ...
''H'' × ''K'' is also countable and hence can be embedded in a countable simple group ''S''. Now, by hypothesis, ''G'' is SQ-universal so ''S'' can be embedded in a quotient group, ''G''/''M'', say, of ''G''. The second isomorphism theorem tells us: :MN/M \cong N/(M \cap N) Now MN/M\triangleleft G/M and ''S'' is a simple subgroup of ''G''/''M'' so either: :MN/M \cap S \cong 1 or: :S\subseteq MN/M \cong N/(M \cap N). The latter cannot be true because it implies ''K'' ⊆ ''H'' × ''K'' ⊆ ''S'' ⊆ ''N''/(''M'' ∩ ''N'') contrary to our choice of ''K''. It follows that ''S'' can be embedded in (''G''/''M'')/(''MN''/''M''), which by the third isomorphism theorem is isomorphic to ''G''/''MN'', which is in turn isomorphic to (''G''/''N'')/(''MN''/''N''). Thus ''S'' has been embedded into a quotient group of ''G''/''N'', and since ''H'' ⊆ ''S'' was an arbitrary countable group, it follows that ''G''/''N'' is SQ-universal. Since every subgroup ''H'' of finite index in a group ''G'' contains a normal subgroup ''N'' also of finite index in ''G'', it easily follows that: :If a group ''G'' is SQ-universal then so is any finite index subgroup ''H'' of ''G''. The converse of this statement is also true.


Variants and generalizations of SQ-universality

Several variants of SQ-universality occur in the literature. The reader should be warned that terminology in this area is not yet completely stable and should read this section with this caveat in mind. Let \mathcal be a class of groups. (For the purposes of this section, groups are defined ''up to isomorphism'') A group ''G'' is called SQ-universal in the class \mathcal if G\in \mathcal and every countable group in \mathcal is isomorphic to a subgroup of a quotient of ''G''. The following result can be proved: : Let ''n'', ''m'' ∈ Z where ''m'' is odd, n>10^ and ''m'' > 1, and let ''B''(''m'', ''n'') be the free m-generator
Burnside group The Burnside problem asks whether a finitely generated group in which every element has finite order must necessarily be a finite group. It was posed by William Burnside in 1902, making it one of the oldest questions in group theory and was infl ...
, then every non- cyclic subgroup of ''B''(''m'', ''n'') is SQ-universal in the class of groups of exponent ''n''. Let \mathcal be a class of groups. A group ''G'' is called SQ-universal for the class \mathcal if every group in \mathcal is isomorphic to a subgroup of a quotient of ''G''. Note that there is no requirement that G\in \mathcal nor that any groups be countable. The standard definition of SQ-universality is equivalent to SQ-universality both ''in'' and ''for'' the class of countable groups. Given a countable group ''G'', call an SQ-universal group ''H'' ''G''-stable, if every non-trivial factor group of ''H'' contains a copy of ''G''. Let \mathcal be the class of finitely presented SQ-universal groups that are ''G''-stable for some ''G'' then Houcine's version of the HNN theorem that can be re-stated as: : The free group on two generators is SQ-universal ''for'' \mathcal. However, there are uncountably many finitely generated groups, and a countable group can only have countably many finitely generated subgroups. It is easy to see from this that: : No group can be SQ-universal ''in'' \mathcal. An infinite class \mathcal of groups is wrappable if given any groups F,G\in \mathcal there exists a simple group ''S'' and a group H\in \mathcal such that ''F'' and ''G'' can be embedded in ''S'' and ''S'' can be embedded in ''H''. The it is easy to prove: :If \mathcal is a wrappable class of groups, ''G'' is an SQ-universal for \mathcal and N\triangleleft G then either ''N'' is SQ-universal for \mathcal or ''G''/''N'' is SQ-universal for \mathcal. :If \mathcal is a wrappable class of groups and ''H'' is of finite index in ''G'' then ''G'' is SQ-universal for the class \mathcal if and only if ''H'' is SQ-universal for \mathcal. The motivation for the definition of wrappable class comes from results such as the Boone-Higman theorem, which states that a countable group ''G'' has soluble word problem if and only if it can be embedded in a simple group ''S'' that can be embedded in a finitely presented group ''F''. Houcine has shown that the group ''F'' can be constructed so that it too has soluble word problem. This together with the fact that taking the direct product of two groups preserves solubility of the word problem shows that: :The class of all finitely presented groups with soluble word problem is wrappable. Other examples of wrappable classes of groups are: *The class of
finite group Finite is the opposite of infinite. It may refer to: * Finite number (disambiguation) * Finite set, a set whose cardinality (number of elements) is some natural number * Finite verb, a verb form that has a subject, usually being inflected or marked ...
s. *The class of torsion free groups. *The class of countable torsion free groups. *The class of all groups of a given infinite
cardinality In mathematics, the cardinality of a set is a measure of the number of elements of the set. For example, the set A = \ contains 3 elements, and therefore A has a cardinality of 3. Beginning in the late 19th century, this concept was generalized ...
. The fact that a class \mathcal is wrappable does not imply that any groups are SQ-universal for \mathcal. It is clear, for instance, that some sort of cardinality restriction for the members of \mathcal is required. If we replace the phrase "isomorphic to a subgroup of a quotient of" with "isomorphic to a subgroup of" in the definition of "SQ-universal", we obtain the stronger concept of S-universal (respectively S-universal for/in \mathcal). The Higman Embedding Theorem can be used to prove that there is a finitely presented group that contains a copy of every finitely presented group. If \mathcal is the class of all finitely presented groups with soluble word problem, then it is known that there is no uniform algorithm to solve the word problem for groups in \mathcal. It follows, although the proof is not a straightforward as one might expect, that no group in \mathcal can contain a copy of every group in \mathcal. But it is clear that any SQ-universal group is ''a fortiori'' SQ-universal for \mathcal. If we let \mathcal be the class of finitely presented groups, and ''F''2 be the free group on two generators, we can sum this up as: *''F''2 is SQ-universal in \mathcal and \mathcal. *There exists a group that is S-universal in \mathcal. *No group is S-universal in \mathcal. The following questions are open (the second implies the first): *Is there a countable group that is not SQ-universal but is SQ-universal ''for'' \mathcal? *Is there a countable group that is not SQ-universal but is SQ-universal ''in'' \mathcal? While it is quite difficult to prove that ''F''2 is SQ-universal, the fact that it is SQ-universal ''for the class of finite groups'' follows easily from these two facts: * Every symmetric group on a finite set can be generated by two elements * Every finite group can be embedded inside a symmetric group—the natural one being the Cayley group, which is the symmetric group acting on this group as the finite set.


SQ-universality in other categories

If \mathcal is a category and \mathcal is a class of
object Object may refer to: General meanings * Object (philosophy), a thing, being, or concept ** Object (abstract), an object which does not exist at any particular time or place ** Physical object, an identifiable collection of matter * Goal, an ai ...
s of \mathcal, then the definition of ''SQ-universal for \mathcal'' clearly makes sense. If \mathcal is a concrete category, then the definition of ''SQ-universal in \mathcal'' also makes sense. As in the group theoretic case, we use the term SQ-universal for an object that is SQ-universal both ''for'' and ''in'' the class of countable objects of \mathcal. Many embedding theorems can be restated in terms of SQ-universality. Shirshov's Theorem that a
Lie algebra In mathematics, a Lie algebra (pronounced ) is a vector space \mathfrak g together with an Binary operation, operation called the Lie bracket, an Alternating multilinear map, alternating bilinear map \mathfrak g \times \mathfrak g \rightarrow ...
of finite or countable dimension can be embedded into a 2-generator Lie algebra is equivalent to the statement that the 2-generator free Lie algebra is SQ-universal (in the category of Lie algebras). This can be proved by proving a version of the Higman, Neumann, Neumann theorem for Lie algebras. However versions of the HNN theorem can be proved for categories where there is no clear idea of a free object. For instance it can be proved that every separable topological group is isomorphic to a topological subgroup of a group having two topological generators (that is, having a dense 2-generator subgroup). A similar concept holds for
free lattice In mathematics, in the area of order theory, a free lattice is the free object corresponding to a lattice. As free objects, they have the universal property. Formal definition Any set ''X'' may be used to generate the free semilattice ''FX''. The f ...
s. The free lattice in three generators is countably infinite. It has, as a sublattice, the free lattice in four generators, and, by induction, as a sublattice, the free lattice in a countable number of generators.L.A. Skornjakov, ''Elements of Lattice Theory'' (1977) Adam Hilger Ltd. ''(see pp.77-78)''


References

* {{DEFAULTSORT:Sq Universal Group Properties of groups Combinatorial group theory