1
$\begingroup$

I believe that the problem stated in the title is false. I have attempted to prove it by manipulating the assumption that there is some $h_1 \in H_1$ and some $h_2 \in H_2$ such that $a_1h_1 = a_2h_2$. The idea was to come to the conclusion that $H_1 \subset H_2$ and $H_2 \subset H_1$ showing they were equal. After trying every type of manipulation I could think of I could not come to this conclusion.

Despite this, I cannot seem to find a counter example. I've put some different GPTs on ChatGPT through the wringer trying to find one or some proof but it also has fell short. Anyone have any ideas?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ It looks like you've mistranslated what you're trying to show when you start talking about $h_1$ and $h_2$. It's actually "if there are $a_1, a_2$ such that for every $h_1$ in $H_1$, the product $a_1 h_1$ can be written as $a_2 h_2$ with $h_2 \in H_2$ and (... vice versa ...), then $H_1 = H_2$." $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 12 at 21:42

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

The statement is correct. We have $a_2^{-1}a_1H_1=H_2$. This implies that the coset $a_2^{-1}a_1H_1$ contains the identity of $G$, and so it has to be equal to the coset $H_1$. Hence $H_1=a_2^{-1}a_1H_1=H_2$.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .