- SQ universal group
In
mathematics , in the realm ofgroup theory , acountable group is said to be SQ universal if every countable group can be embedded in one of itsquotient 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 to the [http://www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/~pjc/lac/ The London Algebra Colloquium] entitled "SQ-universal groups" on 23 May 1968.
Examples of SQ-universal groups
In 1949
Graham Higman ,Bernhard Neumann andHanna Neumann proved that every countable group can be embedded in a two generator group. [G. Higman, B.H. Neumann and H. Neumann, 'Embedding theorems for groups', J. London Math. Soc. 24 (1949), 247-254] Using the contemporary language of SQ-universality, this result says that , thefree group (non-abelian) 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 generators and one arbitrary
relator to anontrivial torsion-free group, always results in an SQ-universal group. [Anton A. Klyachko, 'The SQ-universality of one-relator relative presentation', Arxiv preprint math.GR/0603468, 2006]
*Any non-elementary group that ishyperbolic with respect to a collection of proper subgroups is SQ-universal.
*ManyHNN extension s,free product s andfree products with amalgamation . [Benjamin Fine, Marvin Tretkoff, 'On the SQ-Universality of HNN Groups', Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 73, No. 3 (Mar., 1979), pp. 283-290] [P.M. Neumann: The SQ-universality of some finitely presented groups. J. Austral. Math. Soc. 16, 1-6 (1973)] [K. I. Lossov, 'SQ-universality of free products with amalgamated finite subgroups', Siberian Mathematical Journal Volume 27, Number 6 / November, 1986]
*The four-generatorCoxeter group with presentation: [Muhammad A. Albar, 'On a four-generator Coxeter Group', Internat. J. Math & Math. Sci Vol 24, No 12 (2000), 821-823] :
*Charles F. Miller III's example of a finitely presented SQ-universal group all of whose non-trivial quotients have unsolvable word problem. [C. F. Miller. Decision problems for groups -- survey and reflections. In Algorithms and Classification in Combinatorial Group Theory, pages 1--60. Springer, 1991.]In addition much stronger versions of the Higmann-Neumann-Neumann theorem are now known. Ould Houcine has proved:
: For every countable group there exists a 2-generator SQ-universal group such that can be embedded in every non-trivial quotient of . [A.O. Houcine, 'Satisfaction of existential theories in finitely presented groups and some embedding theorems', Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, Volume 142, Issues 1-3 , October 2006, Pages 351-365]
ome elementary properties of SQ-universal groups
A free group on countably many generators , say, must be embeddable in a quotient of an SQ-universal group . If are chosen such that for all , then they must freely generate a free subgroup of . 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 is an SQ-universal group and is a
normal subgroup of (i.e. ) then either is SQ-universal or thequotient group is SQ-universal.To prove this suppose is not SQ-universal, then there is a countable group that cannot be embedded into a quotient group of . Let be any countable group, then the
direct product is also countable and hence can be embedded in a countable simple group . Now, by hypotheseis, is SQ-universal so can be embedded in a quotient group, , say, of . The secondisomorphism theorem tells us::
Now and is a simple subgroup of so either:
:
or:
:.
The latter cannot be true because it implies contrary to our choice of . It follows that can be embedded in , which by the third
isomorphism theorem is isomorphic to , which is in turn isomorphic to . Thus has been embedded into a quotient group of , and since was an arbitrary countable group, it follows that is SQ-universal.Since every
subgroup offinite index in a group contains a normal subgroup also of finite index in , it easily follows that::If the group is of finite index in , then is SQ-universal if and only if is SQ-universal.
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 be a class of groups. (For the purposes of this section, groups are defined "up to
isomorphism ") A group is called SQ-universal in the class if and every countable group in is isomorphic to a subgroup of a quotient of . The following result can be proved:: Let where is odd, and , and let be the free m-generator
Burnside group , then every non-cyclic subgroup of is SQ-universal in the class of groups of exponent .Let be a class of groups. A group is called SQ-universal for the class if every group in is isomorphic to a subgroup of a quotient of . Note that there is no requirement that 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 , call an SQ-universal group -stable, if every non-trivial factor group of contains a copy of . Let be the class of finitely presented SQ-universal groups that are -stable for some then Houcine's version of the HNN theorem that can be re-stated as:
: The free group on two generators is SQ-universal "for" .
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" .
An
infinite class of groups is wrappable if given any groups there exists a simple group and a group such that and can be embedded in and can be embedded in . The it is easy to prove::If is a wrappable class of groups, is an SQ-universal for and then either is SQ-universal for or is SQ-universal for .
:If is a wrappable class of groups and is of finite index in then is SQ-universal for the class if and only if is SQ-universal for .
The motivation for the definition of wrappable class comes from results such as the
Boone-Higman theorem , which states that a countable group has soluble word problem if and only if it can be embedded in a simple group that can be embedded in a finitely presented group . Houcine has shown that the group 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 s.
*The class of torsion free groups.
*The class of countable torsion free groups.
*The class of all groups of a given infinitecardinality .The fact that a class is wrappable does not imply that any groups are SQ-universal for . It is clear, for instance, that some sort of cardinality restriction for the members of 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 ). 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 is the class of all finitley presented groups with soluble word problem, then it is known that there is no uniform
algorithm to solve the word problem for groups in . It follows, although the proof is not a straightforward as one might expect, that no group in can contain a copy of every group in . But it is clear that any SQ-universal group is "a fortiori" SQ-universal for . If we let be the class of finitely presented groups, and be the free group on two generators, we can sum this up as:* is SQ-universal in and .
*There exists a group that is S-universal in .
*No group is S-universal in .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" ?
*Is there a countable group that is not SQ-universal but is SQ-universal "in" ?While it is quite difficult to prove that 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 theCayley group , which is the symmetric group acting on this group as the finite set.
=SQ-universality in other categories=If is a category and is a class of objects of , then the definition of "SQ-universal for " clearly makes sense. If is a
concrete category , then the definition of "SQ-universal in " 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 .Many embedding theorems can be restated in terms of SQ-universality. Shirshov's Theorem that a
Lie algebra 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. [A.I. Lichtman and M. Shirvani, 'HNN-extensions of Lie algebras', Proc. American Math. Soc. Vol 125, Number 12, December 1997, 3501-3508] 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 separabletopological group is isomorphic to a topological subgroup of a group having two topological generators (that is, having a dense 2-generator subgroup). [Sidney A. Morris and Vladimir Pestov, 'A topological generalization of the Higman-Neumann-Neumann Theorem', Research Report RP-97-222 (May 1997), School of Mathematical and Computing Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington.]A similar concept holds for
free lattice 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
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.