How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Sylow I: every finite group has a Sylow -subgroup
Statement
Let be finite, let be prime, and write with . Then has a subgroup of order , hence a Sylow -subgroup (Sylow -subgroups of a finite group). See Sylow -subgroups of a finite group.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The hypotheses and objects in the Statement.
Let be a finite group, let be prime, and write with and . A subgroup is a Sylow -subgroup when . Equivalently, its order is the largest power of dividing . This is a property of a subgroup and does not presume that such a subgroup exists; existence is proved in thm-sylow-first-theorem. (Sylow -subgroups of a finite group).
Let be prime and let satisfy . Then The valuation is applied only to nonzero integers. (If with , then ).
Let act on and let . The rule is well-defined and bijective. Thus every orbit is naturally in bijection with the left cosets of its stabilizer. (Orbit-stabiliser: , , is a well-defined bijection).
For an action of on and , whenever either side is finite. In particular, if is finite, then . (Orbit-stabiliser cardinality: whenever either side is finite, and for finite ).
Let be a finite group and . Then Consequently, under the canonical embedding , divides . (Lagrange's theorem: for every subgroup of a finite group ).
Let be a property of naturals such that for every , if holds for all then . Then holds for all . (At the hypothesis is vacuous, so is forced.). (Strong (complete) induction).
For a left action of on , the relation defined by for some is an equivalence relation whose class at is , and the distinct orbits partition (The orbits of a group action are the equivalence classes of iff for some , and hence partition the acted-on set).
Proof
Argue by strong induction [L6] on , the induction statement being that every finite group of order has a subgroup of order whenever with . Let be the set of subsets of of size and let act on by left translation, ; this is an action, and because left translation is a bijection of . Counting subsets gives , so [L2] yields , that is .
By [L7] the orbits partition , so is the sum of the orbit sizes. Were to divide every orbit size it would divide , so some orbit has . Choose and put . The bijection of [L3] between and gives , so [L4] gives ; since , the full power divides .
Suppose . Then for every , so for any the set contains , whence and . Thus and itself is a subgroup of order .
Suppose instead , so . By [L5], divides ; writing with , step 2.1 gives , while with gives . Hence with , and the induction hypothesis applied to supplies a subgroup of of order , which is a subgroup of .
Steps 3.1 and 3.2 are exhaustive, so has a subgroup of order , and is the largest power of dividing , so is a Sylow -subgroup by [L1]. At the argument returns the trivial subgroup, of order ; for the trivial group this is itself, and is the case settled in step 3.1.
Depends on
Sylow -subgroups of a finite group
If with , then
Orbit-stabiliser: , , is a well-defined bijection
Orbit-stabiliser cardinality: whenever either side is finite, and for finite
Lagrange's theorem: for every subgroup of a finite group
Strong (complete) induction
The orbits of a group action are the equivalence classes of iff for some , and hence partition the acted-on set