Does the hypergraph of subgroups determine a group?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
18
down vote

favorite
1












A hypergraph is a pair $H=(V,E)$ where $Vneq emptyset$ is a set and $Esubseteqcal P(V)$ is a collection of subsets of $V$. We say two hypergraphs $H_i=(V_i, E_i)$ for $i=1,2$ are isomorphic if there is a bijection $f:V_1to V_2$ such that $f(e_1) in E_2$ for all $e_1in E_1$, and $f^-1(e_2) in E_1$ for all $e_2in E_2$.



If $G$ is a group, denote by $textSub(G)$ the collection of the subgroups of $G$.



Are there non-isomorphic groups $G,H$ such that the hypergraphs $(G, textSub(G))$ and $(H, textSub(H))$ are isomorphic?










share|cite|improve this question























  • So there is the important vertex which is characterized by being on every hyperedge.
    – AHusain
    2 days ago






  • 5




    Possible duplicate of Does subgroup structure of a finite group characterize isomorphism type?
    – verret
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This question reminds me a bit of a conjecture of Thompson -- he found two non-isomorphic maximal subgroups of $M_23$ which both contained the same number of elements of the same order, for every order. This led him to conjecture that if two groups $G$ and $H$ both have the same number of elements of the same order, for every order, and $G$ is solvable, then so is $H$. (This is now proved I believe.) I wonder if one could ask something similar here: Suppose $G$ and $H$ have the same subgroup hypergraph and $G$ is solvable. Then $H$ is solvable...
    – Nick Gill
    14 hours ago











  • Nice comment @NickGill - I think your question is worth asking!
    – Dominic van der Zypen
    14 hours ago






  • 1




    In answer to @NickGill's question: the answer is "yes". Indeed, if G and H have the same lattice of subgroups, then they are already both (super)solvable or both not (super)solvable. There are effective ways to detect solvability from the subgroup lattice: Roland Schmidt gave a characterization in terms of chains of modular elements with a flavor entirely similar to that of the definition. My own favorite characterization is the topological/combinatorial characterization of John Shareshian.
    – Russ Woodroofe
    11 hours ago














up vote
18
down vote

favorite
1












A hypergraph is a pair $H=(V,E)$ where $Vneq emptyset$ is a set and $Esubseteqcal P(V)$ is a collection of subsets of $V$. We say two hypergraphs $H_i=(V_i, E_i)$ for $i=1,2$ are isomorphic if there is a bijection $f:V_1to V_2$ such that $f(e_1) in E_2$ for all $e_1in E_1$, and $f^-1(e_2) in E_1$ for all $e_2in E_2$.



If $G$ is a group, denote by $textSub(G)$ the collection of the subgroups of $G$.



Are there non-isomorphic groups $G,H$ such that the hypergraphs $(G, textSub(G))$ and $(H, textSub(H))$ are isomorphic?










share|cite|improve this question























  • So there is the important vertex which is characterized by being on every hyperedge.
    – AHusain
    2 days ago






  • 5




    Possible duplicate of Does subgroup structure of a finite group characterize isomorphism type?
    – verret
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This question reminds me a bit of a conjecture of Thompson -- he found two non-isomorphic maximal subgroups of $M_23$ which both contained the same number of elements of the same order, for every order. This led him to conjecture that if two groups $G$ and $H$ both have the same number of elements of the same order, for every order, and $G$ is solvable, then so is $H$. (This is now proved I believe.) I wonder if one could ask something similar here: Suppose $G$ and $H$ have the same subgroup hypergraph and $G$ is solvable. Then $H$ is solvable...
    – Nick Gill
    14 hours ago











  • Nice comment @NickGill - I think your question is worth asking!
    – Dominic van der Zypen
    14 hours ago






  • 1




    In answer to @NickGill's question: the answer is "yes". Indeed, if G and H have the same lattice of subgroups, then they are already both (super)solvable or both not (super)solvable. There are effective ways to detect solvability from the subgroup lattice: Roland Schmidt gave a characterization in terms of chains of modular elements with a flavor entirely similar to that of the definition. My own favorite characterization is the topological/combinatorial characterization of John Shareshian.
    – Russ Woodroofe
    11 hours ago












up vote
18
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
18
down vote

favorite
1






1





A hypergraph is a pair $H=(V,E)$ where $Vneq emptyset$ is a set and $Esubseteqcal P(V)$ is a collection of subsets of $V$. We say two hypergraphs $H_i=(V_i, E_i)$ for $i=1,2$ are isomorphic if there is a bijection $f:V_1to V_2$ such that $f(e_1) in E_2$ for all $e_1in E_1$, and $f^-1(e_2) in E_1$ for all $e_2in E_2$.



If $G$ is a group, denote by $textSub(G)$ the collection of the subgroups of $G$.



Are there non-isomorphic groups $G,H$ such that the hypergraphs $(G, textSub(G))$ and $(H, textSub(H))$ are isomorphic?










share|cite|improve this question















A hypergraph is a pair $H=(V,E)$ where $Vneq emptyset$ is a set and $Esubseteqcal P(V)$ is a collection of subsets of $V$. We say two hypergraphs $H_i=(V_i, E_i)$ for $i=1,2$ are isomorphic if there is a bijection $f:V_1to V_2$ such that $f(e_1) in E_2$ for all $e_1in E_1$, and $f^-1(e_2) in E_1$ for all $e_2in E_2$.



If $G$ is a group, denote by $textSub(G)$ the collection of the subgroups of $G$.



Are there non-isomorphic groups $G,H$ such that the hypergraphs $(G, textSub(G))$ and $(H, textSub(H))$ are isomorphic?







co.combinatorics gr.group-theory graph-theory hypergraph






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 14 hours ago

























asked 2 days ago









Dominic van der Zypen

13.3k43172




13.3k43172











  • So there is the important vertex which is characterized by being on every hyperedge.
    – AHusain
    2 days ago






  • 5




    Possible duplicate of Does subgroup structure of a finite group characterize isomorphism type?
    – verret
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This question reminds me a bit of a conjecture of Thompson -- he found two non-isomorphic maximal subgroups of $M_23$ which both contained the same number of elements of the same order, for every order. This led him to conjecture that if two groups $G$ and $H$ both have the same number of elements of the same order, for every order, and $G$ is solvable, then so is $H$. (This is now proved I believe.) I wonder if one could ask something similar here: Suppose $G$ and $H$ have the same subgroup hypergraph and $G$ is solvable. Then $H$ is solvable...
    – Nick Gill
    14 hours ago











  • Nice comment @NickGill - I think your question is worth asking!
    – Dominic van der Zypen
    14 hours ago






  • 1




    In answer to @NickGill's question: the answer is "yes". Indeed, if G and H have the same lattice of subgroups, then they are already both (super)solvable or both not (super)solvable. There are effective ways to detect solvability from the subgroup lattice: Roland Schmidt gave a characterization in terms of chains of modular elements with a flavor entirely similar to that of the definition. My own favorite characterization is the topological/combinatorial characterization of John Shareshian.
    – Russ Woodroofe
    11 hours ago
















  • So there is the important vertex which is characterized by being on every hyperedge.
    – AHusain
    2 days ago






  • 5




    Possible duplicate of Does subgroup structure of a finite group characterize isomorphism type?
    – verret
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This question reminds me a bit of a conjecture of Thompson -- he found two non-isomorphic maximal subgroups of $M_23$ which both contained the same number of elements of the same order, for every order. This led him to conjecture that if two groups $G$ and $H$ both have the same number of elements of the same order, for every order, and $G$ is solvable, then so is $H$. (This is now proved I believe.) I wonder if one could ask something similar here: Suppose $G$ and $H$ have the same subgroup hypergraph and $G$ is solvable. Then $H$ is solvable...
    – Nick Gill
    14 hours ago











  • Nice comment @NickGill - I think your question is worth asking!
    – Dominic van der Zypen
    14 hours ago






  • 1




    In answer to @NickGill's question: the answer is "yes". Indeed, if G and H have the same lattice of subgroups, then they are already both (super)solvable or both not (super)solvable. There are effective ways to detect solvability from the subgroup lattice: Roland Schmidt gave a characterization in terms of chains of modular elements with a flavor entirely similar to that of the definition. My own favorite characterization is the topological/combinatorial characterization of John Shareshian.
    – Russ Woodroofe
    11 hours ago















So there is the important vertex which is characterized by being on every hyperedge.
– AHusain
2 days ago




So there is the important vertex which is characterized by being on every hyperedge.
– AHusain
2 days ago




5




5




Possible duplicate of Does subgroup structure of a finite group characterize isomorphism type?
– verret
2 days ago




Possible duplicate of Does subgroup structure of a finite group characterize isomorphism type?
– verret
2 days ago




3




3




This question reminds me a bit of a conjecture of Thompson -- he found two non-isomorphic maximal subgroups of $M_23$ which both contained the same number of elements of the same order, for every order. This led him to conjecture that if two groups $G$ and $H$ both have the same number of elements of the same order, for every order, and $G$ is solvable, then so is $H$. (This is now proved I believe.) I wonder if one could ask something similar here: Suppose $G$ and $H$ have the same subgroup hypergraph and $G$ is solvable. Then $H$ is solvable...
– Nick Gill
14 hours ago





This question reminds me a bit of a conjecture of Thompson -- he found two non-isomorphic maximal subgroups of $M_23$ which both contained the same number of elements of the same order, for every order. This led him to conjecture that if two groups $G$ and $H$ both have the same number of elements of the same order, for every order, and $G$ is solvable, then so is $H$. (This is now proved I believe.) I wonder if one could ask something similar here: Suppose $G$ and $H$ have the same subgroup hypergraph and $G$ is solvable. Then $H$ is solvable...
– Nick Gill
14 hours ago













Nice comment @NickGill - I think your question is worth asking!
– Dominic van der Zypen
14 hours ago




Nice comment @NickGill - I think your question is worth asking!
– Dominic van der Zypen
14 hours ago




1




1




In answer to @NickGill's question: the answer is "yes". Indeed, if G and H have the same lattice of subgroups, then they are already both (super)solvable or both not (super)solvable. There are effective ways to detect solvability from the subgroup lattice: Roland Schmidt gave a characterization in terms of chains of modular elements with a flavor entirely similar to that of the definition. My own favorite characterization is the topological/combinatorial characterization of John Shareshian.
– Russ Woodroofe
11 hours ago




In answer to @NickGill's question: the answer is "yes". Indeed, if G and H have the same lattice of subgroups, then they are already both (super)solvable or both not (super)solvable. There are effective ways to detect solvability from the subgroup lattice: Roland Schmidt gave a characterization in terms of chains of modular elements with a flavor entirely similar to that of the definition. My own favorite characterization is the topological/combinatorial characterization of John Shareshian.
– Russ Woodroofe
11 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
19
down vote



accepted










In the comments to the question, I notice something which might be an error, or at least is an incomplete response. It is pointed out in the comments that there exist nonisomorphic groups with isomorphic subgroup lattices. While true, that fact doesn't answer this question, since it is possible to have isomorphic subgroup lattices and nonisomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. Even if you assume that the groups have the same order and isomorphic subgroup lattices, it does not immediately follow that they have isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. What is needed is a subgroup preserving and reflecting bijection between the groups.




I am sure the negative answer to this question can be found in Roland Schmidt's book. But I would like to point to a theorem I coauthored after Schmidt's book was published, which applies to this question. Namely:



Thm. For any finite $N$, there is a finite set $X=X_N$ and $N$ binary operations $circ_i$ defined on $X$ such that



(1) $G_i = (X,circ_i)$ is a group for all $i$,

(2) $G_inotcong G_j$ when $ineq j$, and

(3) for all $i, j$, the groups
$G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ have exactly the same subgroups (as sets) for all cardinals $kappa$.



The last item means that, for any fixed $kappa$, the subgroup hypergraphs of $G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ are equal for any $i$ and $j$.




The paper is



Keith A. Kearnes and Agnes Szendrei,

Groups with identical subgroup lattices in all powers.

J. Group Theory 7 (2004), no. 3, 385--402.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Let me mention that your construction yields groups with square-free order (which is quite opposite, and of independent interest, to the case of $p$-groups provided in Russ' answer).
    – YCor
    12 hours ago

















up vote
10
down vote













For large prime $p$, there are uncountably many non-isomorphic Tarski monsters of exponent $p$.



For these groups $G$, the subgroups lattice consists of basically a partition of $Gsmallsetminus1$ into countably many subsets of cardinal $p-1$ (so the subgroups are the whole group, $1$ and the union of $1$ with any component of the partition. These hypergraphs are obviouly isomorphic.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • By the way, the question was previously asked as a comment here mathoverflow.net/questions/309096/… and I gave this answer there (although I ignored the word "hypergraph" which is the relevant notion).
    – YCor
    yesterday


















up vote
5
down vote













As @Keith Kearnes says, the negative answer ought to be somewhere in Roland Schmidt's book. Unless I'm mistaken, it suffices to find two non isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices. Indeed, the elements of $G$ correspond directly with the cosets of the trivial subgroup. By applying the regular group action, you can take any such element (or 1-coset) to be the identity element. The subgroups are the cosets containing the identity. Thus you can determine from the coset lattice the sets of elements in each subgroup (as in the question).



Non-isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices exist, as is discussed in Chapter 9.4 of Schmidt. Something that I like about this discussion is that it is relatively easy to find concrete examples.



I believe that the groups with identities [625, 9] and [625, 10] in the GAP small groups library are explicit examples with isomorphic coset lattices, hence with isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. These groups can be found by following the ideas of Example 9.4.14(b) in Schmidt's book. I haven't checked all the details in GAP, but these two groups at least have the same StructureDescription of (C25 x C5) : C5, and same number of subgroups at each level.



Schmidt constructs these groups by taking certain semidirect products $H rtimes mathbbZ_p$, where $H$ is the nonabelian group of order $p^3$ and exponent $p$. The construction doesn't seem to work for $p=3$, and indeed the result from Huppert that Schmidt cites in the example holds only for $p>3$.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • As far as subgroup of order 5, these groups have 1 normal subgroup, 1 conjugacy class of 5 sgs, and 1 conjugacy class of 25 sgs. (Added this comment when I fixed a 5 that should have been p, after @YCor pointed out a problem.)
    – Russ Woodroofe
    15 hours ago











Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "504"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f312177%2fdoes-the-hypergraph-of-subgroups-determine-a-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
19
down vote



accepted










In the comments to the question, I notice something which might be an error, or at least is an incomplete response. It is pointed out in the comments that there exist nonisomorphic groups with isomorphic subgroup lattices. While true, that fact doesn't answer this question, since it is possible to have isomorphic subgroup lattices and nonisomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. Even if you assume that the groups have the same order and isomorphic subgroup lattices, it does not immediately follow that they have isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. What is needed is a subgroup preserving and reflecting bijection between the groups.




I am sure the negative answer to this question can be found in Roland Schmidt's book. But I would like to point to a theorem I coauthored after Schmidt's book was published, which applies to this question. Namely:



Thm. For any finite $N$, there is a finite set $X=X_N$ and $N$ binary operations $circ_i$ defined on $X$ such that



(1) $G_i = (X,circ_i)$ is a group for all $i$,

(2) $G_inotcong G_j$ when $ineq j$, and

(3) for all $i, j$, the groups
$G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ have exactly the same subgroups (as sets) for all cardinals $kappa$.



The last item means that, for any fixed $kappa$, the subgroup hypergraphs of $G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ are equal for any $i$ and $j$.




The paper is



Keith A. Kearnes and Agnes Szendrei,

Groups with identical subgroup lattices in all powers.

J. Group Theory 7 (2004), no. 3, 385--402.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Let me mention that your construction yields groups with square-free order (which is quite opposite, and of independent interest, to the case of $p$-groups provided in Russ' answer).
    – YCor
    12 hours ago














up vote
19
down vote



accepted










In the comments to the question, I notice something which might be an error, or at least is an incomplete response. It is pointed out in the comments that there exist nonisomorphic groups with isomorphic subgroup lattices. While true, that fact doesn't answer this question, since it is possible to have isomorphic subgroup lattices and nonisomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. Even if you assume that the groups have the same order and isomorphic subgroup lattices, it does not immediately follow that they have isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. What is needed is a subgroup preserving and reflecting bijection between the groups.




I am sure the negative answer to this question can be found in Roland Schmidt's book. But I would like to point to a theorem I coauthored after Schmidt's book was published, which applies to this question. Namely:



Thm. For any finite $N$, there is a finite set $X=X_N$ and $N$ binary operations $circ_i$ defined on $X$ such that



(1) $G_i = (X,circ_i)$ is a group for all $i$,

(2) $G_inotcong G_j$ when $ineq j$, and

(3) for all $i, j$, the groups
$G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ have exactly the same subgroups (as sets) for all cardinals $kappa$.



The last item means that, for any fixed $kappa$, the subgroup hypergraphs of $G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ are equal for any $i$ and $j$.




The paper is



Keith A. Kearnes and Agnes Szendrei,

Groups with identical subgroup lattices in all powers.

J. Group Theory 7 (2004), no. 3, 385--402.






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 1




    Let me mention that your construction yields groups with square-free order (which is quite opposite, and of independent interest, to the case of $p$-groups provided in Russ' answer).
    – YCor
    12 hours ago












up vote
19
down vote



accepted







up vote
19
down vote



accepted






In the comments to the question, I notice something which might be an error, or at least is an incomplete response. It is pointed out in the comments that there exist nonisomorphic groups with isomorphic subgroup lattices. While true, that fact doesn't answer this question, since it is possible to have isomorphic subgroup lattices and nonisomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. Even if you assume that the groups have the same order and isomorphic subgroup lattices, it does not immediately follow that they have isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. What is needed is a subgroup preserving and reflecting bijection between the groups.




I am sure the negative answer to this question can be found in Roland Schmidt's book. But I would like to point to a theorem I coauthored after Schmidt's book was published, which applies to this question. Namely:



Thm. For any finite $N$, there is a finite set $X=X_N$ and $N$ binary operations $circ_i$ defined on $X$ such that



(1) $G_i = (X,circ_i)$ is a group for all $i$,

(2) $G_inotcong G_j$ when $ineq j$, and

(3) for all $i, j$, the groups
$G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ have exactly the same subgroups (as sets) for all cardinals $kappa$.



The last item means that, for any fixed $kappa$, the subgroup hypergraphs of $G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ are equal for any $i$ and $j$.




The paper is



Keith A. Kearnes and Agnes Szendrei,

Groups with identical subgroup lattices in all powers.

J. Group Theory 7 (2004), no. 3, 385--402.






share|cite|improve this answer














In the comments to the question, I notice something which might be an error, or at least is an incomplete response. It is pointed out in the comments that there exist nonisomorphic groups with isomorphic subgroup lattices. While true, that fact doesn't answer this question, since it is possible to have isomorphic subgroup lattices and nonisomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. Even if you assume that the groups have the same order and isomorphic subgroup lattices, it does not immediately follow that they have isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. What is needed is a subgroup preserving and reflecting bijection between the groups.




I am sure the negative answer to this question can be found in Roland Schmidt's book. But I would like to point to a theorem I coauthored after Schmidt's book was published, which applies to this question. Namely:



Thm. For any finite $N$, there is a finite set $X=X_N$ and $N$ binary operations $circ_i$ defined on $X$ such that



(1) $G_i = (X,circ_i)$ is a group for all $i$,

(2) $G_inotcong G_j$ when $ineq j$, and

(3) for all $i, j$, the groups
$G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ have exactly the same subgroups (as sets) for all cardinals $kappa$.



The last item means that, for any fixed $kappa$, the subgroup hypergraphs of $G_i^kappa$ and $G_j^kappa$ are equal for any $i$ and $j$.




The paper is



Keith A. Kearnes and Agnes Szendrei,

Groups with identical subgroup lattices in all powers.

J. Group Theory 7 (2004), no. 3, 385--402.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered 2 days ago









Keith Kearnes

5,46412539




5,46412539







  • 1




    Let me mention that your construction yields groups with square-free order (which is quite opposite, and of independent interest, to the case of $p$-groups provided in Russ' answer).
    – YCor
    12 hours ago












  • 1




    Let me mention that your construction yields groups with square-free order (which is quite opposite, and of independent interest, to the case of $p$-groups provided in Russ' answer).
    – YCor
    12 hours ago







1




1




Let me mention that your construction yields groups with square-free order (which is quite opposite, and of independent interest, to the case of $p$-groups provided in Russ' answer).
– YCor
12 hours ago




Let me mention that your construction yields groups with square-free order (which is quite opposite, and of independent interest, to the case of $p$-groups provided in Russ' answer).
– YCor
12 hours ago










up vote
10
down vote













For large prime $p$, there are uncountably many non-isomorphic Tarski monsters of exponent $p$.



For these groups $G$, the subgroups lattice consists of basically a partition of $Gsmallsetminus1$ into countably many subsets of cardinal $p-1$ (so the subgroups are the whole group, $1$ and the union of $1$ with any component of the partition. These hypergraphs are obviouly isomorphic.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • By the way, the question was previously asked as a comment here mathoverflow.net/questions/309096/… and I gave this answer there (although I ignored the word "hypergraph" which is the relevant notion).
    – YCor
    yesterday















up vote
10
down vote













For large prime $p$, there are uncountably many non-isomorphic Tarski monsters of exponent $p$.



For these groups $G$, the subgroups lattice consists of basically a partition of $Gsmallsetminus1$ into countably many subsets of cardinal $p-1$ (so the subgroups are the whole group, $1$ and the union of $1$ with any component of the partition. These hypergraphs are obviouly isomorphic.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • By the way, the question was previously asked as a comment here mathoverflow.net/questions/309096/… and I gave this answer there (although I ignored the word "hypergraph" which is the relevant notion).
    – YCor
    yesterday













up vote
10
down vote










up vote
10
down vote









For large prime $p$, there are uncountably many non-isomorphic Tarski monsters of exponent $p$.



For these groups $G$, the subgroups lattice consists of basically a partition of $Gsmallsetminus1$ into countably many subsets of cardinal $p-1$ (so the subgroups are the whole group, $1$ and the union of $1$ with any component of the partition. These hypergraphs are obviouly isomorphic.






share|cite|improve this answer












For large prime $p$, there are uncountably many non-isomorphic Tarski monsters of exponent $p$.



For these groups $G$, the subgroups lattice consists of basically a partition of $Gsmallsetminus1$ into countably many subsets of cardinal $p-1$ (so the subgroups are the whole group, $1$ and the union of $1$ with any component of the partition. These hypergraphs are obviouly isomorphic.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered yesterday









YCor

25.5k277121




25.5k277121











  • By the way, the question was previously asked as a comment here mathoverflow.net/questions/309096/… and I gave this answer there (although I ignored the word "hypergraph" which is the relevant notion).
    – YCor
    yesterday

















  • By the way, the question was previously asked as a comment here mathoverflow.net/questions/309096/… and I gave this answer there (although I ignored the word "hypergraph" which is the relevant notion).
    – YCor
    yesterday
















By the way, the question was previously asked as a comment here mathoverflow.net/questions/309096/… and I gave this answer there (although I ignored the word "hypergraph" which is the relevant notion).
– YCor
yesterday





By the way, the question was previously asked as a comment here mathoverflow.net/questions/309096/… and I gave this answer there (although I ignored the word "hypergraph" which is the relevant notion).
– YCor
yesterday











up vote
5
down vote













As @Keith Kearnes says, the negative answer ought to be somewhere in Roland Schmidt's book. Unless I'm mistaken, it suffices to find two non isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices. Indeed, the elements of $G$ correspond directly with the cosets of the trivial subgroup. By applying the regular group action, you can take any such element (or 1-coset) to be the identity element. The subgroups are the cosets containing the identity. Thus you can determine from the coset lattice the sets of elements in each subgroup (as in the question).



Non-isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices exist, as is discussed in Chapter 9.4 of Schmidt. Something that I like about this discussion is that it is relatively easy to find concrete examples.



I believe that the groups with identities [625, 9] and [625, 10] in the GAP small groups library are explicit examples with isomorphic coset lattices, hence with isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. These groups can be found by following the ideas of Example 9.4.14(b) in Schmidt's book. I haven't checked all the details in GAP, but these two groups at least have the same StructureDescription of (C25 x C5) : C5, and same number of subgroups at each level.



Schmidt constructs these groups by taking certain semidirect products $H rtimes mathbbZ_p$, where $H$ is the nonabelian group of order $p^3$ and exponent $p$. The construction doesn't seem to work for $p=3$, and indeed the result from Huppert that Schmidt cites in the example holds only for $p>3$.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • As far as subgroup of order 5, these groups have 1 normal subgroup, 1 conjugacy class of 5 sgs, and 1 conjugacy class of 25 sgs. (Added this comment when I fixed a 5 that should have been p, after @YCor pointed out a problem.)
    – Russ Woodroofe
    15 hours ago















up vote
5
down vote













As @Keith Kearnes says, the negative answer ought to be somewhere in Roland Schmidt's book. Unless I'm mistaken, it suffices to find two non isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices. Indeed, the elements of $G$ correspond directly with the cosets of the trivial subgroup. By applying the regular group action, you can take any such element (or 1-coset) to be the identity element. The subgroups are the cosets containing the identity. Thus you can determine from the coset lattice the sets of elements in each subgroup (as in the question).



Non-isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices exist, as is discussed in Chapter 9.4 of Schmidt. Something that I like about this discussion is that it is relatively easy to find concrete examples.



I believe that the groups with identities [625, 9] and [625, 10] in the GAP small groups library are explicit examples with isomorphic coset lattices, hence with isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. These groups can be found by following the ideas of Example 9.4.14(b) in Schmidt's book. I haven't checked all the details in GAP, but these two groups at least have the same StructureDescription of (C25 x C5) : C5, and same number of subgroups at each level.



Schmidt constructs these groups by taking certain semidirect products $H rtimes mathbbZ_p$, where $H$ is the nonabelian group of order $p^3$ and exponent $p$. The construction doesn't seem to work for $p=3$, and indeed the result from Huppert that Schmidt cites in the example holds only for $p>3$.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • As far as subgroup of order 5, these groups have 1 normal subgroup, 1 conjugacy class of 5 sgs, and 1 conjugacy class of 25 sgs. (Added this comment when I fixed a 5 that should have been p, after @YCor pointed out a problem.)
    – Russ Woodroofe
    15 hours ago













up vote
5
down vote










up vote
5
down vote









As @Keith Kearnes says, the negative answer ought to be somewhere in Roland Schmidt's book. Unless I'm mistaken, it suffices to find two non isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices. Indeed, the elements of $G$ correspond directly with the cosets of the trivial subgroup. By applying the regular group action, you can take any such element (or 1-coset) to be the identity element. The subgroups are the cosets containing the identity. Thus you can determine from the coset lattice the sets of elements in each subgroup (as in the question).



Non-isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices exist, as is discussed in Chapter 9.4 of Schmidt. Something that I like about this discussion is that it is relatively easy to find concrete examples.



I believe that the groups with identities [625, 9] and [625, 10] in the GAP small groups library are explicit examples with isomorphic coset lattices, hence with isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. These groups can be found by following the ideas of Example 9.4.14(b) in Schmidt's book. I haven't checked all the details in GAP, but these two groups at least have the same StructureDescription of (C25 x C5) : C5, and same number of subgroups at each level.



Schmidt constructs these groups by taking certain semidirect products $H rtimes mathbbZ_p$, where $H$ is the nonabelian group of order $p^3$ and exponent $p$. The construction doesn't seem to work for $p=3$, and indeed the result from Huppert that Schmidt cites in the example holds only for $p>3$.






share|cite|improve this answer














As @Keith Kearnes says, the negative answer ought to be somewhere in Roland Schmidt's book. Unless I'm mistaken, it suffices to find two non isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices. Indeed, the elements of $G$ correspond directly with the cosets of the trivial subgroup. By applying the regular group action, you can take any such element (or 1-coset) to be the identity element. The subgroups are the cosets containing the identity. Thus you can determine from the coset lattice the sets of elements in each subgroup (as in the question).



Non-isomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices exist, as is discussed in Chapter 9.4 of Schmidt. Something that I like about this discussion is that it is relatively easy to find concrete examples.



I believe that the groups with identities [625, 9] and [625, 10] in the GAP small groups library are explicit examples with isomorphic coset lattices, hence with isomorphic subgroup hypergraphs. These groups can be found by following the ideas of Example 9.4.14(b) in Schmidt's book. I haven't checked all the details in GAP, but these two groups at least have the same StructureDescription of (C25 x C5) : C5, and same number of subgroups at each level.



Schmidt constructs these groups by taking certain semidirect products $H rtimes mathbbZ_p$, where $H$ is the nonabelian group of order $p^3$ and exponent $p$. The construction doesn't seem to work for $p=3$, and indeed the result from Huppert that Schmidt cites in the example holds only for $p>3$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 15 hours ago

























answered yesterday









Russ Woodroofe

2,39611216




2,39611216











  • As far as subgroup of order 5, these groups have 1 normal subgroup, 1 conjugacy class of 5 sgs, and 1 conjugacy class of 25 sgs. (Added this comment when I fixed a 5 that should have been p, after @YCor pointed out a problem.)
    – Russ Woodroofe
    15 hours ago

















  • As far as subgroup of order 5, these groups have 1 normal subgroup, 1 conjugacy class of 5 sgs, and 1 conjugacy class of 25 sgs. (Added this comment when I fixed a 5 that should have been p, after @YCor pointed out a problem.)
    – Russ Woodroofe
    15 hours ago
















As far as subgroup of order 5, these groups have 1 normal subgroup, 1 conjugacy class of 5 sgs, and 1 conjugacy class of 25 sgs. (Added this comment when I fixed a 5 that should have been p, after @YCor pointed out a problem.)
– Russ Woodroofe
15 hours ago





As far as subgroup of order 5, these groups have 1 normal subgroup, 1 conjugacy class of 5 sgs, and 1 conjugacy class of 25 sgs. (Added this comment when I fixed a 5 that should have been p, after @YCor pointed out a problem.)
– Russ Woodroofe
15 hours ago


















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f312177%2fdoes-the-hypergraph-of-subgroups-determine-a-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest













































































Popular posts from this blog

Peggy Mitchell

Palaiologos

The Forum (Inglewood, California)