I am trying to solve the following problem:
Let Tij(c)∈SL2(Z) (i≠j) be the elementary matrix which represents the elementary row operation of adding the j-th row multiplied by c to the i-th row, A:=T12(2) and B:=T21(2). Let G be a subgroup {(abcd)∈SL2(Z):a≡d≡1(mod4),b≡c≡0(mod2)}. Show that G=⟨A,B⟩.
That ⟨A,B⟩⊂G can be shown easily by induction. The problem is the converse inclusion. I tried to show it by using an analogy from the fact that SL2 is generated by Tij(c). I tried to show that if C∈G is written as a product C1…Cn, where each Ck is of the form Tikjk(ck), then each ck is even, from which what I want to show follows. However I cannot prove this (it may simply be wrong).
I would be grateful if you could provide a clue.
Answer
I want to go by infinite descent, and to show that we can always make a given non-identity element of the group smaller
by multiplying it with a generator or its inverse from the left or right. The trick is then to define "smaller" in a way that this is always possible. This is not guaranteed to work in general, but it is a natural thing to try.
Let g=(abcd) be an element of G. Let us first assume that bd≠0. While that holds, I measure the size of g by the absolute value of the product of the diagonal elements |ad|. The task at hand is then to prove that one of the matrices Ag, A−1g, Bg, B−1g, gA, gA−1, gB, gB−1 is smaller than g in the prescribed sense. In other words we want to make g smaller by adding one of its rows or columns to the other multiplied by ±2 (multiplication by an elementary matrix from the right amount an elementary column operation).
W.l.o.g. we can assume that |a|≥|d| (make the obvious changes to the row/column operations below, if that is not the case. Then it is impossible that
both inequalities |b|>|a| and |c|>|a| hold, as then |bc|>|ad| and the congruences would imply that |detg|≥3. So we have either |b|<|a| or |c|<|a|. In the former case we can decrease |a| by adding the second column multiplied by one of ±2 to the first. As |d| does not change we have the desired conclusion. In the latter case we add a multiply of the second row multiplied by ±2 to the first for similar effect.
The above operation make g smaller in the prescribed sense unless one of the off-diagonal elements is zero. I leave that case to you with the hint that if b=0 or c=0, then you can easily show that a=d=1.
The claim follows. The idea is that if A and B did not generate all of G, there would be a "minimal" missing element.
No comments:
Post a Comment