Chapter 10 — Cosets and the Theorem of Lagrange

Fraleigh, A First Course in Abstract Algebra, 7th edition, Section 10. Study companion for SNU Abstract Algebra (26-1).

Cosets are translated copies of a subgroup. Lagrange’s theorem converts that geometric picture into a divisibility statement: the size of every subgroup divides the size of the group. This is the first time subgroup structure produces a serious counting theorem, and it is the true precursor to quotient groups (Chapter 14).


§10.1 Left and Right Cosets

Definition 10.1 (Left coset). Let HGH \le G and aGa \in G. The left coset of HH determined by aa is

aH={ah:hH}.aH = \{ah : h \in H\}.

Definition 10.2 (Right coset). The right coset of HH determined by aa is

Ha={ha:hH}.Ha = \{ha : h \in H\}.

In an abelian group aH=HaaH = Ha for every aa, because ah=haah = ha. In a non-abelian group they can differ.

Worked examples of cosets

Example 10.3 (Cosets in Z\mathbb{Z}). Take G=ZG = \mathbb{Z} (additive) and H=3Z={0,±3,±6,}H = 3\mathbb{Z} = \{0, \pm 3, \pm 6, \dots\}. Since Z\mathbb{Z} is abelian, left and right cosets agree. Writing cosets additively:

0+3Z=3Z={,6,3,0,3,6,},0 + 3\mathbb{Z} = 3\mathbb{Z} = \{\dots, -6, -3, 0, 3, 6, \dots\}, 1+3Z={,5,2,1,4,7,},1 + 3\mathbb{Z} = \{\dots, -5, -2, 1, 4, 7, \dots\}, 2+3Z={,4,1,2,5,8,}.2 + 3\mathbb{Z} = \{\dots, -4, -1, 2, 5, 8, \dots\}.

These are exactly the residue classes modulo 33. Every integer lies in exactly one of them, so the three cosets partition Z\mathbb{Z}.

Example 10.4 (Cosets in Z6\mathbb{Z}_6). Let G=Z6={0,1,2,3,4,5}G = \mathbb{Z}_6 = \{0,1,2,3,4,5\} and H=2={0,2,4}H = \langle 2 \rangle = \{0, 2, 4\}. Then

0+H={0,2,4},1+H={1,3,5}.0 + H = \{0, 2, 4\}, \qquad 1 + H = \{1, 3, 5\}.

Note 2+H={2,4,0}=0+H2 + H = \{2, 4, 0\} = 0 + H and 3+H={3,5,1}=1+H3 + H = \{3, 5, 1\} = 1 + H. There are exactly two distinct cosets, and [G:H]=6/3=2[G:H] = 6/3 = 2.

Figure: the coset partition of Z6\mathbb{Z}_6 by 2ˉ\langle \bar{2}\rangle.

The two rounded boxes are the two cosets; this is the finite model of the general statement that cosets partition the group.

Example 10.5 (Left and right cosets in S3S_3). Let G=S3G = S_3 and H={e,(1  2  3),(1  3  2)}=(1  2  3)H = \{e, (1\;2\;3), (1\;3\;2)\} = \langle (1\;2\;3) \rangle. Since H=3|H| = 3 and S3=6|S_3| = 6, there are [S3:H]=2[S_3 : H] = 2 cosets.

Left cosets:

eH=H={e,  (1  2  3),  (1  3  2)}.eH = H = \{e,\; (1\;2\;3),\; (1\;3\;2)\}.

Take the transposition (1  2)H(1\;2) \notin H:

(1  2)H={(1  2)e,  (1  2)(1  2  3),  (1  2)(1  3  2)}={(1  2),  (2  3),  (1  3)}.(1\;2)H = \{(1\;2)e,\; (1\;2)(1\;2\;3),\; (1\;2)(1\;3\;2)\} = \{(1\;2),\; (2\;3),\; (1\;3)\}.

Indeed,

(1  2)(1  2  3)=(2  3),(1  2)(1  3  2)=(1  3),(1\;2)(1\;2\;3) = (2\;3), \qquad (1\;2)(1\;3\;2) = (1\;3),

so the left coset is exactly the set of transpositions.

Right cosets:

He=H={e,  (1  2  3),  (1  3  2)}.He = H = \{e,\; (1\;2\;3),\; (1\;3\;2)\}. H(1  2)={(1  2),  (1  2  3)(1  2),  (1  3  2)(1  2)}.H(1\;2) = \{(1\;2),\; (1\;2\;3)(1\;2),\; (1\;3\;2)(1\;2)\}.

Indeed,

(1  2  3)(1  2)=(1  3),(1  3  2)(1  2)=(2  3),(1\;2\;3)(1\;2) = (1\;3), \qquad (1\;3\;2)(1\;2) = (2\;3),

so the right coset is also the set of transpositions.

In this case the left and right cosets happen to be the same as sets (both give {H,{(1  2),(1  3),(2  3)}}\{H, \{(1\;2),(1\;3),(2\;3)\}\}). This is because HH has index 22 in S3S_3, and index-22 subgroups are always normal (see §10.8 and Chapter 14).


§10.1a Reading Coset Structure from a Cayley Table

The Cayley table (or group table) of a finite group GG is the G×G|G| \times |G| multiplication table: the entry in row aa, column bb is the product abab. Every finite group is completely determined by its Cayley table, and the table encodes subgroup and coset information in a visually striking way. This section develops the technique of coset shading that Fraleigh uses in Tables 10.5—10.9.

Quick review: what a Cayley table tells you

For a group G={g1,g2,,gn}G = \{g_1, g_2, \dots, g_n\}, the Cayley table is:

g1g_1g2g_2\cdotsgng_n
g1g_1g1g1g_1 g_1g1g2g_1 g_2\cdotsg1gng_1 g_n
g2g_2g2g1g_2 g_1g2g2g_2 g_2\cdotsg2gng_2 g_n
\vdots\vdots\vdots\ddots\vdots
gng_ngng1g_n g_1gng2g_n g_2\cdotsgngng_n g_n

Two fundamental properties:

  1. Latin square property. Every element of GG appears exactly once in each row and each column. (Proof: left multiplication gagg \mapsto ag is a bijection on GG.)
  2. Identity row/column. If g1=eg_1 = e, then the first row is just g1,g2,,gng_1, g_2, \dots, g_n in order, and so is the first column.

Coset shading: the main idea

Suppose HGH \le G with index [G:H]=k[G:H] = k. The left cosets a1H,a2H,,akHa_1H, a_2H, \dots, a_kH partition GG into kk blocks of equal size. Now rearrange the rows and columns of the Cayley table so that elements within the same coset are adjacent (grouped together). Then assign each coset a shade (say light, medium, dark, etc.) and color every entry abab according to the coset that abab belongs to.

The resulting shaded table reveals whether the cosets themselves form a group.

Example: Z6\mathbb{Z}_6 with H={0,3}H = \{0, 3\}

This is Fraleigh’s Example 10.4. Take G=Z6G = \mathbb{Z}_6 and H={0,3}H = \{0, 3\}, so H=2|H| = 2 and [G:H]=3[G:H] = 3. The three cosets are:

C0={0,3},C1={1,4},C2={2,5}.C_0 = \{0, 3\}, \qquad C_1 = \{1, 4\}, \qquad C_2 = \{2, 5\}.

Rearrange the Cayley table of (Z6,+6)(\mathbb{Z}_6, +_6) so elements are grouped by coset: 0,31,42,50, 3 \mid 1, 4 \mid 2, 5.

+6+_6003311442255
00003311442255
33330044115522
11114422553300
44441155220033
22225533004411
55552200331144

Now shade by coset membership. Write LT (light) for C0={0,3}C_0 = \{0,3\}, MD (medium) for C1={1,4}C_1 = \{1,4\}, DK (dark) for C2={2,5}C_2 = \{2,5\}:

+6+_6003311442255
00LTLTMDMDDKDK
33LTLTMDMDDKDK
11MDMDDKDKLTLT
44MDMDDKDKLTLT
22DKDKLTLTMDMD
55DKDKLTLTMDMD

The critical observation. Look at the 2×22 \times 2 blocks formed by grouping rows and columns by coset. Each block is a single, solid shade. This means that whenever aa and aa' are in the same left coset and bb and bb' are in the same left coset, the products abab and aba'b' land in the same coset. In other words, the coset to which abab belongs depends only on the cosets of aa and bb, not on the particular representatives.

This is exactly the condition needed for the set of cosets to form a group under the induced operation. Reading off the shading gives a 3×33 \times 3 “coset multiplication table”:

LTMDDK
LTLTMDDK
MDMDDKLT
DKDKLTMD

Replacing LT 0\to 0, MD 1\to 1, DK 2\to 2, this is exactly the Cayley table of Z3\mathbb{Z}_3. So the three cosets of HH in Z6\mathbb{Z}_6, with the operation “add representatives and take the coset of the result,” form a group isomorphic to Z3\mathbb{Z}_3. This is the factor group Z6/HZ3\mathbb{Z}_6 / H \cong \mathbb{Z}_3, studied properly in Chapter 14.

Why solid blocks mean “well-defined coset multiplication”

The factor group construction requires a well-defined binary operation on cosets:

(aH)(bH):=(ab)H.(aH)(bH) := (ab)H.

The danger is that aH=aHaH = a'H and bH=bHbH = b'H (i.e., a,aa, a' are in the same coset, and b,bb, b' are in the same coset) but (ab)H(ab)H(ab)H \ne (a'b')H. If that happened, the “operation” would depend on which representative we pick, and would not actually be a function on cosets.

In the shaded Cayley table, a solid block means: for every pair of entries in that block, the product lands in the same coset. So solid blocks \Leftrightarrow well-defined coset multiplication \Leftrightarrow the cosets form a group.

This is precisely the condition that HH is a normal subgroup (aH=HaaH = Ha for all aGa \in G). The full proof is in Chapter 14, but the shaded table gives you a concrete, visual diagnostic.

Counterexample: S3S_3 with a non-normal subgroup

Fraleigh’s Tables 10.8—10.9 illustrate the failure. Take G=S3G = S_3 with the notation from Chapter 8:

ρ0=e,ρ1=(1  2  3),ρ2=(1  3  2),μ1=(2  3),μ2=(1  3),μ3=(1  2).\rho_0 = e, \quad \rho_1 = (1\;2\;3), \quad \rho_2 = (1\;3\;2), \quad \mu_1 = (2\;3), \quad \mu_2 = (1\;3), \quad \mu_3 = (1\;2).

Consider the subgroup H={ρ0,μ1}H = \{\rho_0, \mu_1\} of order 22, with index [S3:H]=3[S_3 : H] = 3.

Left cosets:

ρ0H={ρ0,μ1},ρ1H={ρ1,μ3},ρ2H={ρ2,μ2}.\rho_0 H = \{\rho_0, \mu_1\}, \quad \rho_1 H = \{\rho_1, \mu_3\}, \quad \rho_2 H = \{\rho_2, \mu_2\}.

(Verify: ρ1μ1=(1  2  3)(2  3)=(1  2)=μ3\rho_1 \mu_1 = (1\;2\;3)(2\;3) = (1\;2) = \mu_3, and ρ2μ1=(1  3  2)(2  3)=(1  3)=μ2\rho_2 \mu_1 = (1\;3\;2)(2\;3) = (1\;3) = \mu_2.)

Now write the Cayley table of S3S_3 with elements grouped by left coset: ρ0,μ1ρ1,μ3ρ2,μ2\rho_0, \mu_1 \mid \rho_1, \mu_3 \mid \rho_2, \mu_2, and shade by coset membership.

ρ0\rho_0μ1\mu_1ρ1\rho_1μ3\mu_3ρ2\rho_2μ2\mu_2
ρ0\rho_0LTLTMDMDDKDK
μ1\mu_1LTLTDKDKMDMD
ρ1\rho_1MDMDDKDKLTLT
μ3\mu_3MDDKLTMDDKLT
ρ2\rho_2DKDKLTLTMDMD
μ2\mu_2DKMDMDLTLTDK

(Entries computed from the full S3S_3 multiplication table in Chapter 8.)

Look at the 2×22 \times 2 blocks. They are not solid. For instance, the block in rows {μ3}\{\mu_3\} and columns {ρ0,μ1}\{\rho_0, \mu_1\} has entries MD and DK — two different shades in the same block. This means coset multiplication is not well-defined: different representatives of the same coset can give products in different cosets.

Concretely: ρ1\rho_1 and μ3\mu_3 are both in coset C1={ρ1,μ3}C_1 = \{\rho_1, \mu_3\}, and ρ0\rho_0 is in C0C_0. But ρ1ρ0=ρ1C1\rho_1 \cdot \rho_0 = \rho_1 \in C_1 while μ3ρ0=μ3C1\mu_3 \cdot \rho_0 = \mu_3 \in C_1 — that one is fine. However, looking at other blocks: μ3μ1=(1  2)(2  3)=(1  2  3)=ρ1C1\mu_3 \cdot \mu_1 = (1\;2)(2\;3) = (1\;2\;3) = \rho_1 \in C_1, but μ3ρ1=(1  2)(1  2  3)=(2  3)=μ1C0\mu_3 \cdot \rho_1 = (1\;2)(1\;2\;3) = (2\;3) = \mu_1 \in C_0. Same row-coset, same column-coset, different result-cosets. The block is not solid, and coset multiplication breaks down.

Diagnosis. H={ρ0,μ1}H = \{\rho_0, \mu_1\} is not normal in S3S_3: the left coset ρ1H={ρ1,μ3}\rho_1 H = \{\rho_1, \mu_3\} but the right coset Hρ1={ρ1,μ2}H\rho_1 = \{\rho_1, \mu_2\}, so ρ1HHρ1\rho_1 H \ne H\rho_1.

Contrast: S3S_3 with the normal subgroup ρ1\langle \rho_1 \rangle

Now take H={ρ0,ρ1,ρ2}=(1  2  3)H = \{\rho_0, \rho_1, \rho_2\} = \langle (1\;2\;3) \rangle, which has index 22. The two cosets are:

C0={ρ0,ρ1,ρ2},C1={μ1,μ2,μ3}.C_0 = \{\rho_0, \rho_1, \rho_2\}, \qquad C_1 = \{\mu_1, \mu_2, \mu_3\}.

Group the Cayley table by coset and shade:

ρ0\rho_0ρ1\rho_1ρ2\rho_2μ1\mu_1μ2\mu_2μ3\mu_3
ρ0\rho_0LTLTLTDKDKDK
ρ1\rho_1LTLTLTDKDKDK
ρ2\rho_2LTLTLTDKDKDK
μ1\mu_1DKDKDKLTLTLT
μ2\mu_2DKDKDKLTLTLT
μ3\mu_3DKDKDKLTLTLT

Every 3×33 \times 3 block is a solid shade. Reading off the coset table:

LTDK
LTLTDK
DKDKLT

This is Z2\mathbb{Z}_2. So S3/(1  2  3)Z2S_3 / \langle (1\;2\;3) \rangle \cong \mathbb{Z}_2, as expected for an index-22 subgroup.

Summary: the shading diagnostic

ConditionWhat the shaded table looks likeConsequence
HGH \trianglelefteq G (normal)Every coset-block is a single solid shadeCosets form a group (G/HG/H is well-defined)
HH not normalSome blocks contain mixed shadesNo well-defined coset multiplication

The technique works for any finite group. In practice: write the Cayley table, group elements by coset, shade, and check whether the blocks are uniform. Uniform blocks mean you have a factor group; mixed blocks mean the subgroup is not normal and no factor group exists via those cosets.

This visual approach is revisited in full generality in Chapter 14, where we prove that the cosets of HH form a group under (aH)(bH)=abH(aH)(bH) = abH if and only if HGH \trianglelefteq G.


§10.2 Cosets Partition the Group

The key idea: define a relation on GG by

ab    a1bH.a \sim b \iff a^{-1}b \in H.

Theorem 10.6. The relation \sim is an equivalence relation on GG, and the equivalence class of aa is the left coset aHaH.

Corollary 10.7. The distinct left cosets of HH in GG form a partition of GG. That is, every element of GG belongs to exactly one left coset, and two left cosets are either identical or disjoint.


§10.3 All Cosets Have the Same Size

Theorem 10.8. For any aGa \in G, aH=H|aH| = |H|.

Remark. The same argument shows Ha=H|Ha| = |H| via the bijection hhah \mapsto ha.


§10.4 Lagrange’s Theorem

Theorem 10.9 (Lagrange’s Theorem). If GG is a finite group and HGH \le G, then H|H| divides G|G|.

Definition 10.10 (Index). The index of HH in GG, written [G:H][G:H], is the number of distinct left cosets of HH in GG. By the proof above, if GG is finite then

[G:H]=GH.[G:H] = \frac{|G|}{|H|}.

Example 10.11. [Z6:2]=6/3=2[\mathbb{Z}_6 : \langle 2 \rangle] = 6/3 = 2. [S3:(1  2  3)]=6/3=2[S_3 : \langle (1\;2\;3) \rangle] = 6/3 = 2.


§10.5 Corollaries of Lagrange’s Theorem

Corollary 10.12 (Order of an element divides G|G|). If GG is a finite group and aGa \in G, then the order a|a| divides G|G|.

Corollary 10.13. If GG is a finite group with G=n|G| = n, then an=ea^n = e for all aGa \in G.

Corollary 10.14 (Groups of prime order are cyclic). If G=p|G| = p where pp is prime, then GG is cyclic and every non-identity element is a generator.

Corollary 10.15 (Fermat’s Little Theorem). If pp is prime and gcd(a,p)=1\gcd(a, p) = 1, then

ap11(modp).a^{p-1} \equiv 1 \pmod{p}.

Example. Take p=7p = 7, a=3a = 3. Then 36=7293^6 = 729. Now 729=1047+1729 = 104 \cdot 7 + 1, so 361(mod7)3^6 \equiv 1 \pmod{7}, confirming Fermat.

Corollary 10.16 (Euler’s Theorem). If gcd(a,n)=1\gcd(a, n) = 1, then

aϕ(n)1(modn),a^{\phi(n)} \equiv 1 \pmod{n},

where ϕ(n)=Zn\phi(n) = |\mathbb{Z}_n^{*}| is Euler’s totient function.

Remark. Fermat’s little theorem is the special case n=pn = p prime, since ϕ(p)=p1\phi(p) = p - 1.


§10.6 The Converse of Lagrange is FALSE

A natural question: if dd divides G|G|, must GG have a subgroup of order dd? The answer is no.

Theorem 10.17. The alternating group A4A_4 has order 1212 but no subgroup of order 66.

Remark. The converse of Lagrange does hold for some classes of groups — for instance, finite abelian groups, and more generally pp-groups by Sylow theory (Chapter 36 in Fraleigh). The full Sylow theorems guarantee subgroups of order pkp^k for prime powers dividing G|G|.


§10.7 Worked Coset Computations

Cosets of 3\langle 3 \rangle in Z12\mathbb{Z}_{12}

Let G=Z12G = \mathbb{Z}_{12} and H=3={0,3,6,9}H = \langle 3 \rangle = \{0, 3, 6, 9\}. Then H=4|H| = 4, so [G:H]=12/4=3[G:H] = 12/4 = 3. The three cosets:

0+H={0,3,6,9},0 + H = \{0, 3, 6, 9\}, 1+H={1,4,7,10},1 + H = \{1, 4, 7, 10\}, 2+H={2,5,8,11}.2 + H = \{2, 5, 8, 11\}.

Check: 3+H={3,6,9,0}=0+H3 + H = \{3, 6, 9, 0\} = 0 + H, 4+H={4,7,10,1}=1+H4 + H = \{4, 7, 10, 1\} = 1 + H, etc. Every element of Z12\mathbb{Z}_{12} appears in exactly one coset.

Cosets of 2\langle 2 \rangle in Z8\mathbb{Z}_8

Let G=Z8G = \mathbb{Z}_8 and H=2={0,2,4,6}H = \langle 2 \rangle = \{0, 2, 4, 6\}. Then H=4|H| = 4, [G:H]=8/4=2[G : H] = 8/4 = 2. The cosets:

0+H={0,2,4,6},1+H={1,3,5,7}.0 + H = \{0, 2, 4, 6\}, \qquad 1 + H = \{1, 3, 5, 7\}.

These are the even and odd elements of Z8\mathbb{Z}_8.

Left vs.\ right cosets: an example where they differ

Let G=S3G = S_3 and K={e,(1  2)}K = \{e, (1\;2)\}. Then K=2|K| = 2 and [S3:K]=3[S_3 : K] = 3.

Left cosets:

eK={e,(1  2)},eK = \{e, (1\;2)\}, (1  2  3)K={(1  2  3),  (1  2  3)(1  2)}={(1  2  3),  (1  3)},(1\;2\;3)K = \{(1\;2\;3),\; (1\;2\;3)(1\;2)\} = \{(1\;2\;3),\; (1\;3)\}, (1  3  2)K={(1  3  2),  (1  3  2)(1  2)}={(1  3  2),  (2  3)}.(1\;3\;2)K = \{(1\;3\;2),\; (1\;3\;2)(1\;2)\} = \{(1\;3\;2),\; (2\;3)\}.

(Verify: (1  2  3)(1  2)(1\;2\;3)(1\;2): 12211\to 2\to 2\to 1… applying (1  2)(1\;2) first then (1  2  3)(1\;2\;3): 1231\to 2\to 3, 2122\to 1\to 2, 3313\to 3\to 1. That is (1  3)(1\;3). And (1  3  2)(1  2)(1\;3\;2)(1\;2): 1211\to 2\to 1, 2132\to 1\to 3, 3323\to 3\to 2, giving (2  3)(2\;3).)

Right cosets:

Ke={e,(1  2)},Ke = \{e, (1\;2)\}, K(1  2  3)={(1  2  3),  (1  2)(1  2  3)}={(1  2  3),  (2  3)},K(1\;2\;3) = \{(1\;2\;3),\; (1\;2)(1\;2\;3)\} = \{(1\;2\;3),\; (2\;3)\}, K(1  3  2)={(1  3  2),  (1  2)(1  3  2)}={(1  3  2),  (1  3)}.K(1\;3\;2) = \{(1\;3\;2),\; (1\;2)(1\;3\;2)\} = \{(1\;3\;2),\; (1\;3)\}.

(Verify: (1  2)(1  2  3)(1\;2)(1\;2\;3): apply (1  2  3)(1\;2\;3) first, then (1  2)(1\;2): 1211\to 2\to 1, 2332\to 3\to 3, 3123\to 1\to 2. That is (2  3)(2\;3). And (1  2)(1  3  2)(1\;2)(1\;3\;2): apply (1  3  2)(1\;3\;2) first, then (1  2)(1\;2): 1331\to 3\to 3, 2122\to 1\to 2, 3213\to 2\to 1. That is (1  3)(1\;3).)

Compare:

Left cosetRight coset
{e,(1  2)}\{e, (1\;2)\}{e,(1  2)}\{e, (1\;2)\}
{(1  2  3),(1  3)}\{(1\;2\;3), (1\;3)\}{(1  2  3),(2  3)}\{(1\;2\;3), (2\;3)\}
{(1  3  2),(2  3)}\{(1\;3\;2), (2\;3)\}{(1  3  2),(1  3)}\{(1\;3\;2), (1\;3)\}

The left and right cosets are different. For instance, (1  3)(1\;3) sits in the coset (1  2  3)K(1\;2\;3)K on the left, but in K(1  3  2)K(1\;3\;2) on the right. This happens because K={e,(1  2)}K = \{e, (1\;2)\} is not a normal subgroup of S3S_3.


§10.8 When Left Cosets Equal Right Cosets — Preview of Normal Subgroups

Definition 10.18 (Normal subgroup, preview). A subgroup HGH \le G is normal, written HGH \trianglelefteq G, if aH=HaaH = Ha for every aGa \in G.

When HH is normal, the set of cosets G/H={aH:aG}G/H = \{aH : a \in G\} itself becomes a group under the operation (aH)(bH)=abH(aH)(bH) = abH. This is the factor group or quotient group (Chapter 14).

Observation 10.19. Every subgroup of index 22 is normal.

This is why the cosets of (1  2  3)\langle (1\;2\;3) \rangle in S3S_3 (Example 10.5) had the same left and right decomposition: the index was 22.


§10.9 Counting Argument Applications

Lagrange’s theorem is a powerful tool for restricting the structure of a group without knowing the group’s multiplication table.

Example 10.20. Let G=12|G| = 12. By Lagrange, the possible orders of subgroups are the divisors of 1212: 1,2,3,4,6,121, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12. The possible orders of elements are also restricted to these values.

Example 10.21. Let G=35=57|G| = 35 = 5 \cdot 7. Then every element has order dividing 3535, so the possible element orders are 1,5,7,351, 5, 7, 35. In particular, no element has order 22 or 33.

Example 10.22. Suppose GG is a group of order 66 with an element aa of order 66. Then a=G\langle a \rangle = G, so GG is cyclic. On the other hand, S3S_3 has order 66 but no element of order 66 (the elements have orders 1,2,31, 2, 3), so S3S_3 is not cyclic. These are in fact the only two groups of order 66, up to isomorphism.

Example 10.23 (Subgroup lattice of Z12\mathbb{Z}_{12}). The subgroups of Z12\mathbb{Z}_{12} are:

  • 1=Z12\langle 1 \rangle = \mathbb{Z}_{12} (order 1212),
  • 2={0,2,4,6,8,10}\langle 2 \rangle = \{0,2,4,6,8,10\} (order 66),
  • 3={0,3,6,9}\langle 3 \rangle = \{0,3,6,9\} (order 44),
  • 4={0,4,8}\langle 4 \rangle = \{0,4,8\} (order 33),
  • 6={0,6}\langle 6 \rangle = \{0,6\} (order 22),
  • 0={0}\langle 0 \rangle = \{0\} (order 11).

Every subgroup order (1,2,3,4,6,121,2,3,4,6,12) divides 1212, as Lagrange guarantees. The index of each is [G:H]=12/H[G:H] = 12/|H|.


§10.10 Lang’s Perspective — Cosets as Fibers

Serge Lang (Algebra, Ch. I) views cosets through the lens of the natural projection. If HGH \le G, define the surjection

π:GG/H,π(a)=aH,\pi : G \to G/H, \qquad \pi(a) = aH,

where G/HG/H denotes the set of left cosets (not necessarily a group unless HH is normal). The fiber of π\pi over the coset aHaH is

π1(aH)={gG:gH=aH}=aH.\pi^{-1}(aH) = \{g \in G : gH = aH\} = aH.

So each fiber is a left coset, and the fibers partition GG.

Lagrange’s theorem becomes a statement about fibers of a surjection: all fibers have the same cardinality H|H|, and there are [G:H][G:H] fibers, so G=[G:H]H|G| = [G:H] \cdot |H|.

This viewpoint generalizes beyond groups: whenever a surjection f:XYf: X \to Y between finite sets has all fibers of the same size nn, then X=nY|X| = n \cdot |Y|. Lagrange’s theorem says that the natural projection of a group onto its coset space always has this equi-fiber property.

When HGH \trianglelefteq G, the set G/HG/H is itself a group and π\pi is a group homomorphism. Lagrange then becomes the special case of the first isomorphism theorem where the homomorphism is the projection.


Productive Struggle — what Lagrange does and does not give you

Common wrong guess 1

If dd divides G|G|, then GG must contain a subgroup of order dd.

Where it breaks. Lagrange’s theorem only says that subgroup orders must divide G|G|. It is a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. The counterexample in §10.6 is the standard warning: A4A_4 has order 1212, but no subgroup of order 66.

Repaired method. Use Lagrange as a restriction tool:

  • to rule subgroup orders out,
  • to restrict possible element orders,
  • to guide a search.

But do not treat divisibility as an existence theorem. Existence usually requires an actual construction, extra structure, or deeper results such as the Sylow theorems.

Common wrong guess 2

Left cosets and right cosets are just two notations for the same translated copy.

Where it breaks. In a nonabelian group, left and right multiplication can move a subgroup differently. The computation with K={e,(1  2)}S3K=\{e,(1\;2)\}\le S_3 shows exactly this: (1  2  3)K(1\;2\;3)K and K(1  2  3)K(1\;2\;3) are different sets.

Repaired method. Treat the equality aH=HaaH=Ha as a theorem-level statement, not a notation-level convenience. If left and right cosets agree for every aa, that is precisely the preview of normality that opens the door to quotient groups in Chapter 14.

These two mistakes are worth keeping side by side. The first overreads a counting theorem into an existence theorem. The second overreads a notation pattern into a structural symmetry. Both are examples of why Chapter 10 must be read carefully rather than slogan-first.