Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2009/iii/paper-1/2/b/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2009 iii Paper 1 2 b Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The allowed algebraic characterization is the Boone-Higman theorem:The simple group need not itself be finitely presented. The primary statement is Theorem I of An algebraic characterization of groups with soluble word problem. In particular, a finitely generated group with insoluble word problem for a group cannot embed in any finitely presented simple group: otherwise take that group as both and in the characterization.
Use the following effective form of the permitted Messuage lemma for groups. Given a finite group presentation of and a word , one can algorithmically write a finite presentation such that in implies , while implies that embeds in . The construction is performed without first deciding whether is trivial. A collapse-and-embedding lemma with these properties is also stated as Lemma 5.13 in Combinatorial Group Theory. No proof of that allowed lemma is needed here.
Fix a finitely presented group with insoluble word problem for a group, whose existence is allowed. For each input word in its generators, construct by the lemma and then form the finite presentation ofIf , then , which is a nontrivial simple group. If , the lemma embeds in , and the normal form theorem for a free product embeds in . If were simple, it would be a finitely presented simple group containing , contradicting the characterization. HenceAn algorithm deciding simplicity from arbitrary finite presentations would therefore solve the insoluble word problem for a group in . This proves simplicity of finitely presented groups is algorithmically undecidable. Using avoids any convention about whether the trivial group is called simple.
New to topics? Read the docs here!