The Number of Conjugacy Classes

From MaRDI portal





Let \(\mathcal G\) stand in general for a finite group; \(p\) for a prime number. Let \(m\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 1}\). Consider \[ {\mathcal G}_m=\{{\mathcal G};\;p\mid|{\mathcal G}|\Rightarrow p\equiv 1\pmod m\}. \] Let \(B(m)\) be the greatest common divisor of all numbers \(|{\mathcal G}|-s\), where \(\mathcal G\) runs through \({\mathcal G}_m\). Here \(s\) stands for the number of conjugacy classes of \(\mathcal G\). In this paper the following is proved. Theorem. If \(m>2\), then \(B(m)\) is the least common multiple of 48 and \(2m^2\). Also \(B(2)=16\) and \(B(1)=1\). The proof is elementary, without using representation theory. It uses the facts that each of 3, 16 and \(2m^2\) divides \(B(m)\). The case \(3\mid B(m)\) is proved here by elementary means; the case \(2m^2\mid B(m)\) likewise as done by \textit{B. Poonen} [in Am. Math. Mon. 102, No. 5, 440-442 (1995; Zbl 0828.11002)]. The fact \(16\mid B(m)\) follows for \(m>2\) from \(B(2)\mid B(m)\), whereas Burnside proved that \(16\mid B(2)\) (before 1911). Reviewer's remark: Using representation theory, Burnside proved that if \(|\mathcal G|\) is odd, then \(|\mathcal G|\equiv s\pmod{16}\). Does there exist an elementary proof, i.e. without using representation theory and without using the Feit-Thompson theorem on the solvability of finite groups of odd order? A result by K. A. Hirsch in that direction seems to be unjustified.











This page was built for publication: The Number of Conjugacy Classes

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4222477)