Lagrange's theorem Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-14
For a finite group and a subgroup , the group order of divides the group order of :Here is the index of a subgroup, the number of distinct left cosets. It is also the number of distinct right cosets: inversion gives a bijection between the two collections. No normal subgroup assumption is needed for Lagrange's theorem. The normal subgroup condition matters when constructing a quotient group, rather than when counting a partition of a set.
The beauty of Lagrange's theorem is that an arithmetic restriction follows from a structural picture. A group can be tiled by equal-sized cosets of any subgroup. To see the count, choose one representative from each left coset. Every group element has exactly one expression for these chosen representatives and : different rows do not overlap, and multiplication by is a bijection from to its row. Counting rows times row size gives the formula. See MIT's symmetries notes, section 2.
The additive cyclic group above gives from . Another subgroup, , has cosets and , giving . In , the subgroup also gives , despite its distinct left and right coset partitions. Thus equal row sizes persist in a nonabelian group. A proposed subgroup of size four in either group is impossible: four does not divide six. This filters possible subgroups before any search for group generators.
Apply Lagrange's theorem to the cyclic subgroup generated by a group element . Its size is the order of a group element, so and . In the additive example, has order of a group element , since modulo six; the corresponding multiplicative statement becomes . A group of prime group order is consequently a cyclic group: any nonidentity group element generates a subgroup whose size is greater than one and divides that prime, forcing it to be the whole group. See MIT's cyclic-group notes. The same counting idea underlies the orbit-stabilizer theorem: the orbit of a group action is parametrized by cosets of its stabilizer subgroup.
Historically, Lagrange's theorem grew from investigations of permutations of roots of a polynomial; see St Andrews' account of Lagrange's early work. The modern statement about arbitrary finite groups should not be read back into the early work. Carmichael's 1921 review explicitly cautioned against attributing the full result to Lagrange; see Carmichael's historical note, reproduced by St Andrews. Finally, Lagrange's theorem supplies a necessary size condition; the failure of the converse to Lagrange's theorem below explains its limit.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2009 ia Paper 3 2D Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-09-24