Groups with no proper nontrivial subgroups 2026-10-18
A nontrivial group has no proper nontrivial subgroups exactly when it is a cyclic group of prime group order. To prove necessity without presupposing finiteness, take . Its cyclic subgroup is nontrivial and hence equals . An infinite-order generator would give the proper nontrivial subgroup , so its order is finite. If were composite, a proper divisor with would make another proper nontrivial subgroup. Thus is prime. Conversely Lagrange's theorem excludes intermediate subgroup orders in a prime-order group. The qualification “nontrivial” is necessary because every group with more than one element has the proper trivial subgroup .
Let be a quarter-turn and a reflection of the square. The dihedral group is generated by with and , and its elements are . Two generators are minimal because this group is not cyclic. Its subgroups of order two are and for . Its subgroups of order four are , and .
A group homomorphism obeys for all elements; a group isomorphism is a bijective group homomorphism. Take the rotation subgroup and defineThe quaternion element has order four, so the map is well defined modulo four, preserves products and is injective onto . Surjectivity onto all eight quaternion elements is not required of a homomorphism.
A cyclic group is generated by the powers of one element. The final claim needs the usual qualification no nontrivial proper subgroup, and : the trivial subgroup is proper in every nontrivial group, even one of prime order. With that interpretation, if has prime order , Lagrange's theorem permits only subgroup orders one and . Conversely, if its order is composite, choose a divisor with . The subgroup has order , strictly between one and . This proves the assertion described by groups with no proper nontrivial subgroups.
A cyclic group is generated by one element: . The hypothesis needs the qualification no proper nontrivial subgroup: every nontrivial group has the proper trivial subgroup , so the literal wording admits no examples.
Under that intended hypothesis, choose . The subgroup is nontrivial and must therefore be all of , proving cyclicity. If had infinite order, then would be nontrivial and proper, since is not an even power of an infinite-order generator. Thus has finite order and .
If were composite, choose a divisor with . Then would have order , strictly between one and , again contradicting the hypothesis. ConsequentlyConversely, Lagrange's theorem shows that a group of prime order has only itself and its trivial subgroup. This proves the characterization of groups with no proper nontrivial subgroups, even without assuming finiteness at the outset.
For any cyclic subgroup of order , defineBoth preserve products because scalar phases and planar rotations add their angles. Each sends the generator to an element of exact order , so both have trivial kernel and are faithful representations.
For , take : the generator images are and . For each order-two subgroup take its nonidentity element ; the images are and . For the trivial subgroup the unique images are and , which are faithful on a one-element group.
The one-dimensional representation of here must use complex scalars. There is no faithful one-dimensional real representation of , since a nonzero real scalar of finite order is or , and neither has order four. The two-dimensional representations above are real.
Lagrange's theorem states that for a subgroup of a finite group ,The left cosets of partition , and multiplication by a coset representative is a bijection from onto that coset, explaining the formula. If is prime, then is either or , so or . Thus the correct conclusion is no proper nontrivial subgroup. The trivial subgroup is proper for every group of prime order, so the wording in the question needs this qualification.