0
$\begingroup$

Original (Flawed) Question

Why is it that if a group is of the order $pqn$ where $p, q$ are distinct primes and $n$ is some integer coprime to $p$ and $q$, then there is a non-abelian subgroup of order $pq$? (I am reading some notes and the author says this without proving it, so I assume it is very elementary.)

Revised Question

Sorry about this confusing question, I think I have misunderstood it. (As @QiaoChuYuan kindly suggested.) It should be saying for a cyclic group of order $pqn$ where $p,q,n$ are as described above, AND $p$ divides $q-1$ then there is a non-abelian subgroup of order $pq$. Does this make sense now? If so could someone please tell me why it is true? Thank you.

  • 1
    @User1835639: your edited statement is still clearly false, and the cyclic group is still a counterexample. Can you quote from the relevant section of the notes? I think you are misunderstanding something still.2012-02-05

1 Answers 1

3

The original claim is just not true. There is an abelian group of every order.

  • 0
    Yup. It sounds like he is trying to say that for a fixed order there *exists* a group with such properties (which probably follows from some semidirect product construction -- given the "dividing $q-1$" condition).2012-02-05