Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups

Study Sheet

Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups

When cosets form a group, and the three isomorphism theorems

Normal Subgroups

Concept
Normal subgroup

A subgroup N≤GN \le G is normal, written N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G, if gNg−1=NgNg^{-1} = N for every g∈Gg \in G, where gNg−1={gng−1:n∈N}gNg^{-1} = \{gng^{-1} : n \in N\}. Equivalently, gN=NggN = Ng for every g∈Gg \in G: the left and right cosets of NN agree.

Conjugation n↦gng−1n \mapsto gng^{-1} never changes NN as a set, though it may rearrange its elements. This is exactly the extra condition needed for the left cosets of NN to form a group under (aN)(bN)=(ab)N(aN)(bN) = (ab)N (the next section): without it, two different choices of representative for the same cosets can give different products. Every subgroup of an abelian group is automatically normal, since gng−1=ngng^{-1} = n for all g,ng, n — normality is a question only for non-abelian groups. Topic 6 already met one normal subgroup in disguise: the kernel of any homomorphism is closed under conjugation by the whole group, so ker⁡φ⊴G\ker\varphi \trianglelefteq G always.

Example
⟨r⟩\langle r\rangle is normal in D4D_4
1234
The rotation subgroup <r>: four turns of the square, closed under conjugation by any symmetry.

In D4={e,r,r2,r3,s,rs,r2s,r3s}D_4 = \{e, r, r^2, r^3, s, rs, r^2s, r^3s\} (Topic 6), let N=⟨r⟩={e,r,r2,r3}N = \langle r\rangle = \{e, r, r^2, r^3\}, the rotations. Since NN already contains every power of rr, conjugating by a rotation keeps NN fixed pointwise. Conjugating by the reflection ss sends rr to srs−1=srs=r−1=r3∈Nsrs^{-1} = srs = r^{-1} = r^3 \in N (using sr=r−1ssr = r^{-1}s and s2=es^2 = e), and every other element of NN along with it. So sNs−1=NsNs^{-1} = N as well, and N⊴D4N \trianglelefteq D_4.

Example
Is ⟨s⟩\langle s\rangle normal in D4D_4?
1234
The mirror fixing one vertex generates <s>; rotating the mirror by r lands on a different reflection.

Let H=⟨s⟩={e,s}H = \langle s\rangle = \{e, s\}, order 22, and test conjugation by rr: rsr−1=rsr3rsr^{-1} = rsr^3. Using sr=r−1ssr = r^{-1}s repeatedly, rsr3=(rs)r3=r(sr)r2=r(r−1s)r2=sr2=r2srsr^3 = (rs)r^3 = r(sr)r^2 = r(r^{-1}s)r^2 = sr^2 = r^2s (moving ss past each rr flips its sign). So rsr−1=r2srsr^{-1} = r^2s, which is neither ee nor ss: r2s∉Hr^2s \notin H. One failing conjugate is enough, so HH is not normal in D4D_4, even though ∣H∣|H| divides ∣D4∣|D_4| and HH passes Lagrange's theorem fine.

Example
A normal subgroup of S4S_4 built from conjugacy

Let N={e,(1 2)(3 4),(1 3)(2 4),(1 4)(2 3)}N = \{e, (1\,2)(3\,4), (1\,3)(2\,4), (1\,4)(2\,3)\}, the identity together with the three ways to pair up {1,2,3,4}\{1,2,3,4\} into two disjoint 22-cycles. First, NN is a subgroup: any two of the three double-transpositions compose to the third or to ee (for instance (1 2)(3 4)⋅(1 3)(2 4)=(1 4)(2 3)(1\,2)(3\,4)\cdot(1\,3)(2\,4) = (1\,4)(2\,3)). For normality, conjugating a double-transposition by any g∈S4g \in S_4 just relabels its two pairs by gg, which can only produce another double-transposition (or, if gg itself fixes the pairing, the same one back) — never a 33-cycle or a single transposition. So conjugation always lands back inside NN, and N⊴S4N \trianglelefteq S_4.

Side note
Where it goes wrong

gNg−1=NgNg^{-1} = N means the SET NN maps to itself, not that each element is individually fixed. In the S4S_4 example, conjugating (1 2)(3 4)(1\,2)(3\,4) by (1 2 3)(1\,2\,3) gives (2 3)(1 4)=(1 4)(2 3)(2\,3)(1\,4) = (1\,4)(2\,3) — a different element of NN, not the one you started with. NN is still normal: the whole set came back to itself, just permuted internally. Confusing "setwise fixed" with "pointwise fixed" is the single most common error with this definition.

Try it
Try it: is this subgroup normal?

Using the conjugation rule rsr−1=r2srsr^{-1} = r^2s found above, is ⟨r2s⟩={e,r2s}\langle r^2s\rangle = \{e, r^2s\} normal in D4D_4?

Show the answer

Conjugate r2sr^2s by rr: r(r2s)r−1=r3sr−1r(r^2s)r^{-1} = r^3sr^{-1}. Since sr−1=rssr^{-1} = rs (sliding ss past r−1r^{-1} flips its sign), this is r3(rs)=r4s=sr^3(rs) = r^4s = s (using r4=er^4 = e). Since s∉{e,r2s}s \notin \{e, r^2s\}, this conjugate escapes the subgroup, so ⟨r2s⟩\langle r^2s\rangle is not normal in D4D_4 — order-22 reflection subgroups of D4D_4 are never normal, only the rotation subgroup and the whole group and {e}\{e\} are.

Quotient Groups

Concept
The quotient group G/NG/N

For N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G, the quotient group G/NG/N is the set of cosets of NN with multiplication (aN)(bN)=(ab)N(aN)(bN) = (ab)N. This is well defined exactly because NN is normal (proved in Why It Works), and G/NG/N is itself a group: identity NN, inverse (aN)−1=a−1N(aN)^{-1} = a^{-1}N, and ∣G/N∣=[G:N]=∣G∣/∣N∣|G/N| = [G:N] = |G|/|N| by Lagrange (Topic 5).

A quotient group "divides out" by NN: every element of NN collapses to the identity coset, and two elements of GG become equal in G/NG/N exactly when they differ by something in NN. This is the same idea as Zn=Z/nZ\mathbb Z_n = \mathbb Z / n\mathbb Z from the very first topics — the integers modulo nn ARE the quotient of Z\mathbb Z by the subgroup nZn\mathbb Z, and G/NG/N generalizes that construction to any normal subgroup of any group. The well-definedness condition is the entire reason normality matters: pick any representatives a,a′∈aNa, a' \in aN and b,b′∈bNb, b' \in bN, and (aN)(bN)(aN)(bN) must come out the same whichever representatives you multiply.

Example
A cyclic quotient: Z12/⟨6⟩\mathbb Z_{12}/\langle 6\rangle

Let N=⟨6⟩={0,6}N = \langle 6\rangle = \{0, 6\} in Z12\mathbb Z_{12}, order 22, so [Z12:N]=12/2=6[{\mathbb Z_{12}}:N] = 12/2 = 6. The six cosets are k+Nk + N for k=0,…,5k = 0, \ldots, 5. Adding cosets by adding representatives, (1+N)+(1+N)=2+N(1+N)+(1+N) = 2+N, and repeating, k⋅(1+N)=k+Nk\cdot(1+N) = k+N, which only returns to NN when 6∣k6 \mid k. So 1+N1+N has order 66 in the quotient, generating all of it: Z12/⟨6⟩≅Z6\mathbb Z_{12}/\langle 6\rangle \cong \mathbb Z_6.

Example
A non-abelian quotient collapses to Z2\mathbb Z_2

Let N=A3={e,(1 2 3),(1 3 2)}⊴S3N = A_3 = \{e, (1\,2\,3), (1\,3\,2)\} \trianglelefteq S_3 (normal since it is the kernel of the sign map, Topic 6). There are [S3:A3]=6/3=2[S_3:A_3] = 6/3 = 2 cosets, NN and (1 2)N(1\,2)N. Multiplying the nontrivial coset by itself: (1 2)N⋅(1 2)N=(1 2)(1 2)N=eN=N(1\,2)N \cdot (1\,2)N = (1\,2)(1\,2)N = eN = N, since (1 2)2=e(1\,2)^2 = e. So S3/A3S_3/A_3 has two elements, one of which squares to the identity — it is Z2\mathbb Z_2, even though S3S_3 itself is non-abelian.

Example
D4/⟨r2⟩D_4/\langle r^2\rangle is abelian, though D4D_4 is not
D4 / <r²>·NrNsNrsNNNrNsNrsNrNrNNrsNsNsNsNrsNNrNrsNrsNsNrNN
Every nonidentity coset of <r²> squares back to N: the quotient is Klein four, not cyclic.

Let N=⟨r2⟩={e,r2}⊴D4N = \langle r^2\rangle = \{e, r^2\} \trianglelefteq D_4 (normal: r2r^2 is fixed by conjugation by rr, and srs−1=r−1=r3srs^{-1}=r^{-1}=r^3 also squares to r2r^2, more carefully checked in Why It Works). There are 8/2=48/2 = 4 cosets: N,rN,sN,rsNN, rN, sN, rsN. Since r2∈Nr^2 \in N and s2=e∈Ns^2 = e \in N, both (rN)2=r2N=N(rN)^2 = r^2N = N and (sN)2=N(sN)^2 = N: every generator has order 22 in the quotient. Checking the mixed product both ways, (rN)(sN)=rsN(rN)(sN) = rsN and (sN)(rN)=srN=r−1sN=r3sN(sN)(rN) = srN = r^{-1}sN = r^3sN; since r3s=r2⋅rsr^3s = r^2\cdot rs differs from rsrs by the element r2∈Nr^2 \in N, r3sN=rsNr^3sN = rsN as cosets — so the two orders agree and D4/ND_4/N is abelian. With three elements of order 22 besides the identity, D4/⟨r2⟩≅Z2×Z2D_4/\langle r^2\rangle \cong \mathbb Z_2 \times \mathbb Z_2.

Side note
Where it goes wrong

Trying to form G/HG/H for a non-normal HH gives an operation that depends on which representative you pick — it is not a group at all. Take H=⟨s⟩={e,s}H = \langle s\rangle = \{e,s\} in D4D_4 (shown not normal above), so the coset rH={r,rs}rH = \{r, rs\} has two representatives, rr and rsrs. Squaring the coset two different ways: using rr, r⋅r=r2r\cdot r = r^2, landing in the coset r2H={r2,r2s}r^2H = \{r^2, r^2s\}; using rsrs instead, (rs)(rs)=r(sr)s=r(r−1s)s=s2=e(rs)(rs) = r(sr)s = r(r^{-1}s)s = s^2 = e, landing in the coset eH=H={e,s}eH = H = \{e, s\}. Since r2H≠Hr^2H \ne H, the two representatives of the SAME coset rHrH give two different answers for "(rH)(rH)(rH)(rH)" — the rule is not even well defined unless HH is normal.

Try it
Try it: order of a quotient group

In Z18\mathbb Z_{18}, let N=⟨6⟩={0,6,12}N = \langle 6\rangle = \{0, 6, 12\}. What is Z18/N\mathbb Z_{18}/N, as a familiar group?

Show the answer

∣N∣=3|N| = 3, so ∣Z18/N∣=18/3=6|\mathbb Z_{18}/N| = 18/3 = 6. The coset 1+N1+N has order 66: adding it to itself kk times gives k+Nk+N, which equals NN only when 6∣k6 \mid k, and 66 is the smallest such kk. A cyclic group of order 66 generated by one coset is Z6\mathbf{\mathbb Z_6}.

The First Isomorphism Theorem

Concept
First Isomorphism Theorem

For a homomorphism φ:G→H\varphi: G \to H, ker⁡φ⊴G\ker\varphi \trianglelefteq G and G/ker⁡φ≅im⁡φG/\ker\varphi \cong \operatorname{im}\varphi, via the map a ker⁡φ↦φ(a)a\,\ker\varphi \mapsto \varphi(a).

This theorem says every homomorphism factors into two simple steps: collapse GG by its kernel, then relabel. Collapsing by the kernel is forced — anything that already maps to eHe_H has to become indistinguishable from eHe_H — and once that collapsing is done, nothing is left to cause two different images, so the resulting map is automatically injective, hence an isomorphism onto its image. It explains the coincidence Topic 6 flagged, ∣ker⁡φ∣⋅∣im⁡φ∣=∣G∣|\ker\varphi|\cdot|\operatorname{im}\varphi| = |G|: this is just ∣G/ker⁡φ∣=∣G∣/∣ker⁡φ∣|G/\ker\varphi| = |G|/|\ker\varphi| matching ∣im⁡φ∣|\operatorname{im}\varphi|. The theorem is also the reason Zn\mathbb Z_n deserves its name: Zn=Z/nZ\mathbb Z_n = \mathbb Z/n\mathbb Z is exactly Z/ker⁡φ\mathbb Z/\ker\varphi for φ:Z→Zn\varphi: \mathbb Z \to \mathbb Z_n, k↦k mod nk \mapsto k \bmod n.

Example
Reduction mod 44 on Z12\mathbb Z_{12}
012345678910110123
The three shaded elements of Z12 collapse to 0; every other fiber has size 3 as well.

Let φ:Z12→Z4\varphi: \mathbb Z_{12} \to \mathbb Z_4 send k↦k mod 4k \mapsto k \bmod 4. Then ker⁡φ={0,4,8}\ker\varphi = \{0, 4, 8\} (order 33) and im⁡φ=Z4\operatorname{im}\varphi = \mathbb Z_4 (every residue is hit, order 44). The First Isomorphism Theorem predicts Z12/{0,4,8}≅Z4\mathbb Z_{12}/\{0,4,8\} \cong \mathbb Z_4, and indeed the quotient has order 12/3=412/3 = 4, matching ∣im⁡φ∣|\operatorname{im}\varphi|.

Example
The sign map on S4S_4

For sgn⁡:S4→{1,−1}\operatorname{sgn}: S_4 \to \{1,-1\}, ker⁡(sgn⁡)=A4\ker(\operatorname{sgn}) = A_4, the even permutations, with ∣A4∣=12|A_4| = 12 (half of ∣S4∣=24|S_4|=24, since the even and odd permutations are in bijection via multiplying by any fixed transposition). The image is all of {1,−1}\{1,-1\}, order 22. First Isomorphism Theorem: S4/A4≅Z2S_4/A_4 \cong \mathbb Z_2, and 24/12=224/12 = 2 checks out.

Example
The squaring map on U(16)U(16)

Let φ:U(16)→U(16)\varphi: U(16) \to U(16) send x↦x2 mod 16x \mapsto x^2 \bmod 16; it is a homomorphism since U(16)={1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15}U(16) = \{1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15\} is abelian, so (xy)2=x2y2(xy)^2 = x^2y^2. Squaring every element: 1,9,9,1,1,9,9,11,9,9,1,1,9,9,1 for x=1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15x=1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15 respectively (e.g. 52=25≡95^2=25\equiv9, 72=49≡1(mod16)7^2=49\equiv1 \pmod{16}). So ker⁡φ={1,7,9,15}\ker\varphi = \{1,7,9,15\}, order 44, and im⁡φ={1,9}\operatorname{im}\varphi = \{1,9\}, order 22; indeed 4⋅2=8=∣U(16)∣4 \cdot 2 = 8 = |U(16)|. By the theorem, U(16)/{1,7,9,15}≅{1,9}≅Z2U(16)/\{1,7,9,15\} \cong \{1,9\} \cong \mathbb Z_2.

Side note
Where it goes wrong

The theorem gives G/ker⁡φ≅im⁡φG/\ker\varphi \cong \operatorname{im}\varphi, the image — NOT the whole codomain HH, unless φ\varphi happens to be surjective. Let φ:Z12→Z8\varphi: \mathbb Z_{12} \to \mathbb Z_8 send k↦4k mod 8k \mapsto 4k \bmod 8; this is a homomorphism with ker⁡φ={0,2,4,6,8,10}\ker\varphi = \{0,2,4,6,8,10\} (the even residues, order 66) and im⁡φ={0,4}\operatorname{im}\varphi = \{0,4\} (order 22), since 4k mod 84k \bmod 8 is only ever 00 or 44. The quotient Z12/ker⁡φ\mathbb Z_{12}/\ker\varphi has order 12/6=212/6=2, matching ∣im⁡φ∣=2|\operatorname{im}\varphi|=2 — but the codomain Z8\mathbb Z_8 has order 88, nothing like 22. Writing "G/ker⁡φ≅HG/\ker\varphi \cong H" here would be flatly wrong.

Try it
Try it: First Isomorphism Theorem

Let φ:Z15→Z3\varphi: \mathbb Z_{15} \to \mathbb Z_3 send k↦k mod 3k \mapsto k \bmod 3. Find ker⁡φ\ker\varphi, im⁡φ\operatorname{im}\varphi, and the isomorphism the theorem gives.

Show the answer

ker⁡φ={0,3,6,9,12}\ker\varphi = \{0,3,6,9,12\}, order 55 (the multiples of 33 in Z15\mathbb Z_{15}), and every residue mod 33 is hit, so im⁡φ=Z3\operatorname{im}\varphi = \mathbb Z_3, order 33. Since 5⋅3=155 \cdot 3 = 15, the theorem gives Z15/{0,3,6,9,12}≅Z3\mathbb Z_{15}/\{0,3,6,9,12\} \cong \mathbf{\mathbb Z_3}.

The Second and Third Isomorphism Theorems

Concept
Second and Third Isomorphism Theorems

Let N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G. Second: for any H≤GH \le G, HN={hn:h∈H,n∈N}HN = \{hn : h\in H, n\in N\} is a subgroup of GG, H∩N⊴HH \cap N \trianglelefteq H, and HN/N≅H/(H∩N)HN/N \cong H/(H\cap N). Third: if N≤K⊴GN \le K \trianglelefteq G as well, then K/N⊴G/NK/N \trianglelefteq G/N and (G/N)/(K/N)≅G/K(G/N)/(K/N) \cong G/K.

Both theorems are the First Isomorphism Theorem in disguise, applied to a cleverly chosen map (Why It Works). The Second theorem says that merging a subgroup HH into a normal subgroup NN only ever "sees" the part of HH already outside NN: dividing HNHN by NN gives back exactly HH divided by its overlap with NN — a diamond-shaped relationship between HH, NN, H∩NH\cap N, and HNHN that is often drawn as a lattice diagram. The Third theorem says quotients can be taken in stages: dividing by KK all at once gives the same answer as first dividing by the smaller N≤KN \le K, then dividing what is left by the leftover piece K/NK/N — the group-theoretic version of GK=G/NK/N\frac{G}{K} = \frac{G/N}{K/N} cancelling like a fraction.

Example
Second Isomorphism Theorem in Z24\mathbb Z_{24}

Let H=⟨4⟩={0,4,8,12,16,20}H = \langle 4\rangle = \{0,4,8,12,16,20\} (order 66) and N=⟨6⟩={0,6,12,18}N = \langle 6\rangle = \{0,6,12,18\} (order 44) in Z24\mathbb Z_{24}; both are normal since Z24\mathbb Z_{24} is abelian. Then H∩N=⟨12⟩={0,12}H \cap N = \langle 12\rangle = \{0,12\} (order 22, generated by lcm⁡(4,6)=12\operatorname{lcm}(4,6)=12) and HN=⟨2⟩HN = \langle 2\rangle, all 1212 even residues (generated by gcd⁡(4,6)=2\gcd(4,6)=2). Checking the theorem: ∣HN∣/∣N∣=12/4=3|HN|/|N| = 12/4 = 3 and ∣H∣/∣H∩N∣=6/2=3|H|/|H\cap N| = 6/2 = 3 — they agree, so HN/N≅H/(H∩N)≅Z3HN/N \cong H/(H\cap N) \cong \mathbb Z_3.

Example
Third Isomorphism Theorem in Z24\mathbb Z_{24}

Keep K=⟨4⟩={0,4,8,12,16,20}K = \langle 4\rangle = \{0,4,8,12,16,20\} (order 66) and let N=⟨12⟩={0,12}N = \langle 12\rangle = \{0,12\} (order 22); since 1212 is a multiple of 44, N≤KN \le K. Then ∣G/N∣=24/2=12|G/N| = 24/2 = 12 and ∣K/N∣=6/2=3|K/N| = 6/2 = 3, so (G/N)/(K/N)(G/N)/(K/N) has order 12/3=412/3 = 4. Directly, ∣G/K∣=24/6=4|G/K| = 24/6 = 4 as well — the two sides match, both isomorphic to Z4\mathbb Z_4, exactly as (G/N)/(K/N)≅G/K(G/N)/(K/N) \cong G/K demands.

Example
The Second Isomorphism Theorem needs only NN normal

In S4S_4, let N={e,(1 2)(3 4),(1 3)(2 4),(1 4)(2 3)}⊴S4N = \{e,(1\,2)(3\,4),(1\,3)(2\,4),(1\,4)(2\,3)\} \trianglelefteq S_4 (shown normal above) and H=⟨(1 2 3)⟩={e,(1 2 3),(1 3 2)}H = \langle(1\,2\,3)\rangle = \{e,(1\,2\,3),(1\,3\,2)\}, order 33 — itself NOT normal in S4S_4, since conjugating (1 2 3)(1\,2\,3) by (1 4)(1\,4) gives (4 2 3)=(2 3 4)∉H(4\,2\,3) = (2\,3\,4) \notin H. Since HH has order 33 (prime) and NN has only elements of order 11 or 22, H∩N={e}H \cap N = \{e\}. Then HNHN has order 3⋅4/1=123\cdot4/1 = 12; since H,N⊆A4H, N \subseteq A_4 and ∣A4∣=12|A_4|=12 (Topic 5), HN=A4HN = A_4. The theorem gives A4/N≅H/{e}≅H≅Z3A_4/N \cong H/\{e\} \cong H \cong \mathbb Z_3 — a clean isomorphism, even though HH itself was never normal in S4S_4.

Side note
Where it goes wrong

The Second Isomorphism Theorem requires only N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G; HH can be any subgroup at all, normal or not — the previous example used a non-normal H=⟨(1 2 3)⟩H = \langle(1\,2\,3)\rangle and the theorem still applied perfectly, because what actually gets divided out, H∩NH \cap N, is always normal IN HH (never claimed to be normal in the bigger group GG). The error is assuming HH must be normal in GG too, and refusing to apply the theorem to a non-normal subgroup when it is exactly the right tool.

Try it
Try it: Second Isomorphism Theorem

In Z30\mathbb Z_{30}, let H=⟨5⟩H = \langle 5\rangle (order 66) and N=⟨6⟩N = \langle 6\rangle (order 55). Find H∩NH\cap N, HNHN, and the group HN/NHN/N is isomorphic to.

Show the answer

Since gcd⁡(5,6)=1\gcd(5,6)=1, H∩N=⟨lcm⁡(5,6)⟩=⟨30⟩={0}H\cap N = \langle\operatorname{lcm}(5,6)\rangle = \langle 30\rangle = \{0\}, trivial. And HN=⟨gcd⁡(5,6)⟩=⟨1⟩=Z30HN = \langle\gcd(5,6)\rangle = \langle 1\rangle = \mathbb Z_{30}, all of it. So HN/N≅H/{0}≅HHN/N \cong H/\{0\} \cong H, and since ∣H∣=6|H|=6 is cyclic, HN/N≅Z6HN/N \cong \mathbf{\mathbb Z_6}.

The Center and the Commutator Subgroup

Concept
Center and commutator subgroup

The center Z(G)={z∈G:zg=gz for all g∈G}Z(G) = \{z \in G : zg = gz \text{ for all } g \in G\} is the set of elements commuting with everything. The commutator subgroup G′=⟨[a,b]:a,b∈G⟩G' = \langle [a,b] : a,b\in G\rangle, generated by all commutators [a,b]=a−1b−1ab[a,b] = a^{-1}b^{-1}ab, is the smallest normal subgroup with G/G′G/G' abelian. Both Z(G)Z(G) and G′G' are normal (Why It Works), and GG is abelian iff Z(G)=GZ(G) = G iff G′={e}G' = \{e\}.

These are two opposite measurements of how far GG is from being abelian. Z(G)Z(G) collects the elements that already behave abelianly with the rest of the group; G′G' collects exactly the failures of commutativity, [a,b]=e[a,b] = e precisely when ab=baab=ba, so G′={e}G' = \{e\} exactly when every pair commutes. Quotienting by G′G' forces commutativity by construction — G/G′G/G' is the largest abelian "shadow" of GG one can build as a quotient, called the abelianization. The two need not coincide: Section 2 already found D4/⟨r2⟩D_4/\langle r^2\rangle abelian, which hints that ⟨r2⟩\langle r^2\rangle is tied to both of these invariants at once, made precise below.

Example
Z(D4)=⟨r2⟩Z(D_4) = \langle r^2\rangle

From Section 2, r2r^2 commutes with every rotation (rotations commute with each other) and with every reflection, since sr2s−1=(srs−1)2=(r−1)2=r−2=r2sr^2s^{-1} = (srs^{-1})^2 = (r^{-1})^2 = r^{-2} = r^2 — so r2∈Z(D4)r^2 \in Z(D_4). No other nonidentity element works: r∉Z(D4)r \notin Z(D_4) since srs−1=r−1≠rsrs^{-1}=r^{-1}\ne r, and no reflection commutes with rr either, by the same computation that showed ⟨s⟩\langle s\rangle is not normal. So Z(D4)={e,r2}Z(D_4) = \{e, r^2\} exactly — the same subgroup by which Section 2 found the abelian quotient D4/⟨r2⟩≅Z2×Z2D_4/\langle r^2\rangle \cong \mathbb Z_2\times\mathbb Z_2.

Example
Z(S3)={e}Z(S_3) = \{e\}

Test r=(1 2 3)r=(1\,2\,3): it fails to commute with s=(1 2)s=(1\,2), since rs=(1 2 3)(1 2)=(1 3)rs = (1\,2\,3)(1\,2) = (1\,3) while sr=(1 2)(1 2 3)=(2 3)sr = (1\,2)(1\,2\,3) = (2\,3), and (1 3)≠(2 3)(1\,3)\ne(2\,3). So r∉Z(S3)r \notin Z(S_3), and by symmetry neither does r2r^2 or any transposition (each fails against some other element the same way). With every nonidentity element ruled out, Z(S3)={e}Z(S_3) = \{e\}: S3S_3 has a trivial center, even though some of its elements (like rr) commute with SOME others (like r2r^2).

Example
The commutator subgroup of S4S_4 is A4A_4

Since S4/A4≅Z2S_4/A_4 \cong \mathbb Z_2 is abelian (shown in Section 3), A4A_4 is a normal subgroup with abelian quotient, so S4′⊆A4S_4' \subseteq A_4 — the commutator subgroup can never be bigger than any such subgroup. For the reverse inclusion, compute one commutator: a=(1 2)a=(1\,2), b=(1 3)b=(1\,3) give [a,b]=a−1b−1ab=(1 2)(1 3)(1 2)(1 3)=(1 2 3)[a,b] = a^{-1}b^{-1}ab = (1\,2)(1\,3)(1\,2)(1\,3) = (1\,2\,3), a 33-cycle. Since 33-cycles generate all of A4A_4 (Topic 4), and S4′S_4' is a subgroup containing this 33-cycle, S4′⊇A4S_4' \supseteq A_4 as well. Together, S4′=A4S_4' = A_4, order 1212 — while Z(S4)={e}Z(S_4) = \{e\} is trivial, the same way Z(S3)Z(S_3) was: the center and the commutator subgroup can be wildly different sizes.

Side note
Where it goes wrong

It is tempting to guess G′=Z(G)G' = Z(G) always, since D4D_4 happened to satisfy D4′=Z(D4)=⟨r2⟩D_4' = Z(D_4) = \langle r^2\rangle above. The S4S_4 example kills that guess outright: ∣Z(S4)∣=1|Z(S_4)| = 1 while ∣S4′∣=∣A4∣=12|S_4'| = |A_4| = 12 — about as different as two subgroups of the same group can be. Z(G)Z(G) and G′G' measure different things (who commutes with everyone, versus what must be divided out to force commutativity) and only coincide by coincidence, as they did for D4D_4.

Try it
Try it: the commutator subgroup of D4D_4

Compute [r,s]=r−1s−1rs[r,s] = r^{-1}s^{-1}rs directly in D4D_4, and use it to find D4′D_4'.

Show the answer

Since s−1=ss^{-1}=s and srs−1=srs=r−1sr s^{-1}=sr s = r^{-1} (sliding ss past rr flips its sign), [r,s]=r−1(s−1rs)=r−1⋅r−1=r−2=r2[r,s] = r^{-1}(s^{-1}rs) = r^{-1}\cdot r^{-1} = r^{-2} = r^2. So D4′⊇⟨r2⟩D_4' \supseteq \langle r^2\rangle. Since D4/⟨r2⟩D_4/\langle r^2\rangle is already abelian (Section 2), no bigger subgroup is forced, so equality holds: D4′=⟨r2⟩={e,r2}D_4' = \langle r^2\rangle = \mathbf{\{e, r^2\}} — and here it does equal Z(D4)Z(D_4).

Why It Works

Suppose gNg−1⊆NgNg^{-1} \subseteq N for every g∈Gg \in G (the containment alone, which looks weaker than full equality). Apply this to g−1g^{-1} as well: g−1N(g−1)−1=g−1Ng⊆Ng^{-1}N(g^{-1})^{-1} = g^{-1}Ng \subseteq N, which rearranges (left-multiply by gg, right-multiply by g−1g^{-1}) to N⊆gNg−1N \subseteq gNg^{-1}. Combined with the original containment, gNg−1=NgNg^{-1} = N. So checking gNg−1⊆NgNg^{-1} \subseteq N for every gg already forces full equality — there is no weaker, one-sided version of normality to worry about separately.

(⇐\Leftarrow) Suppose N⊴GN \trianglelefteq G and a,a′∈aNa, a' \in aN, b,b′∈bNb,b'\in bN; write a′=an1a'=an_1, b′=bn2b'=bn_2. Then a′b′=an1bn2=ab(b−1n1b)n2a' b' = an_1bn_2 = ab(b^{-1}n_1b)n_2. Since NN is normal, b−1n1b∈Nb^{-1}n_1b \in N, so (b−1n1b)n2∈N(b^{-1}n_1b)n_2 \in N, giving a′b′∈abNa' b' \in abN — the same coset as abab, regardless of which representatives were chosen. (⇒\Rightarrow) Suppose instead the rule is well defined for some subgroup NN that is not assumed normal. For any g∈Gg\in G and n∈Nn\in N, compare the cosets of gg and gngn (equal, since n∈Nn\in N) multiplied by g−1g^{-1}: (gN)(g−1N)(gN)(g^{-1}N) must equal (gnN)(g−1N)(gnN)(g^{-1}N). The left side contains gg−1=egg^{-1}=e, so it equals NN; well-definedness forces the right side, which contains gng−1gng^{-1}, to also equal NN. So gng−1∈Ngng^{-1}\in N for every g,ng,n — exactly normality.

Topic 6 already showed ker⁡φ⊴G\ker\varphi \trianglelefteq G and im⁡φ≤H\operatorname{im}\varphi \le H. Define φˉ:G/ker⁡φ→im⁡φ\bar\varphi: G/\ker\varphi \to \operatorname{im}\varphi by φˉ(a ker⁡φ)=φ(a)\bar\varphi(a\,\ker\varphi) = \varphi(a). Well defined: if a ker⁡φ=a′ ker⁡φa\,\ker\varphi = a'\,\ker\varphi then a−1a′∈ker⁡φa^{-1}a'\in\ker\varphi, so φ(a)−1φ(a′)=φ(a−1a′)=eH\varphi(a)^{-1}\varphi(a')=\varphi(a^{-1}a')=e_H, giving φ(a)=φ(a′)\varphi(a)=\varphi(a'). Homomorphism: φˉ((aker⁡φ)(bker⁡φ))=φˉ(ab ker⁡φ)=φ(ab)=φ(a)φ(b)=φˉ(aker⁡φ)φˉ(bker⁡φ)\bar\varphi((a\ker\varphi)(b\ker\varphi)) = \bar\varphi(ab\,\ker\varphi) = \varphi(ab) = \varphi(a)\varphi(b) = \bar\varphi(a\ker\varphi)\bar\varphi(b\ker\varphi). Injective: if φˉ(aker⁡φ)=eH\bar\varphi(a\ker\varphi)=e_H then φ(a)=eH\varphi(a)=e_H, so a∈ker⁡φa\in\ker\varphi, meaning aker⁡φa\ker\varphi is the identity coset. Surjective onto im⁡φ\operatorname{im}\varphi: every element there is φ(a)=φˉ(aker⁡φ)\varphi(a)=\bar\varphi(a\ker\varphi) for some aa, by definition of image. So φˉ\bar\varphi is an isomorphism.

Let N⊴GN\trianglelefteq G and H≤GH\le G. Restrict the quotient map π:G→G/N\pi: G \to G/N, g↦gNg\mapsto gN, to HH, giving a homomorphism ψ=π∣H:H→G/N\psi = \pi|_H: H \to G/N. Its kernel is {h∈H:hN=N}={h∈H:h∈N}=H∩N\{h\in H : hN = N\} = \{h\in H : h\in N\} = H\cap N, which is therefore normal in HH (kernels always are, Topic 6). Its image is {hN:h∈H}\{hN : h\in H\}, which equals HN/NHN/N: every coset hNhN with h∈Hh\in H is a coset of the form (hn)N(hn)N for hn∈HNhn\in HN, and conversely. Since H∩N⊴HH\cap N\trianglelefteq H is a kernel, HNHN (a union of cosets closed under the group operation via ψ\psi's image) is a genuine subgroup of GG. Applying the First Isomorphism Theorem to ψ\psi: H/(H∩N)≅im⁡ψ=HN/NH/(H\cap N) \cong \operatorname{im}\psi = HN/N.

Let N≤K⊴GN \le K \trianglelefteq G with N⊴GN\trianglelefteq G too. Define ψ:G/N→G/K\psi: G/N \to G/K by ψ(gN)=gK\psi(gN) = gK. Well defined: if gN=g′NgN=g' N then g−1g′∈N⊆Kg^{-1}g'\in N\subseteq K, so gK=g′KgK=g' K. It is a homomorphism since both maps are built from the same multiplication: ψ((gN)(hN))=ψ(ghN)=ghK=(gK)(hK)=ψ(gN)ψ(hN)\psi((gN)(hN))=\psi(ghN)=ghK=(gK)(hK)=\psi(gN)\psi(hN). Its image is all of G/KG/K, since every coset gKgK comes from gNgN. Its kernel is {gN:gK=K}={gN:g∈K}=K/N\{gN : gK=K\} = \{gN : g\in K\} = K/N, which is therefore normal in G/NG/N. By the First Isomorphism Theorem applied to ψ\psi: (G/N)/(K/N)≅im⁡ψ=G/K(G/N)/(K/N) \cong \operatorname{im}\psi = G/K.

For Z(G)Z(G): it is a subgroup (if z1,z2z_1,z_2 commute with every gg, so does z1z2−1z_1z_2^{-1}), and for any g∈Gg\in G, z∈Z(G)z\in Z(G): gzg−1=gg−1z=z∈Z(G)gzg^{-1} = gg^{-1}z = z \in Z(G) (using zg=gzzg=gz, i.e. zg−1=g−1zzg^{-1}=g^{-1}z), so Z(G)Z(G) is fixed pointwise by conjugation, hence certainly normal. For G′G': conjugating a commutator gives another commutator, g[a,b]g−1=[gag−1,gbg−1]g[a,b]g^{-1} = [gag^{-1}, gbg^{-1}] (direct substitution), so conjugation permutes the generating set of G′G' and therefore sends G′G' into itself; applying this to g−1g^{-1} as well gives equality, so G′⊴GG'\trianglelefteq G. Finally, abab and baba always land in the same coset of G′G': (ba)−1(ab)=a−1b−1ab=[a,b]∈G′(ba)^{-1}(ab) = a^{-1}b^{-1}ab = [a,b] \in G' by definition, so abG′=baG′abG' = baG', i.e. (aG′)(bG′)=(bG′)(aG′)(aG')(bG') = (bG')(aG') for every a,b∈Ga,b\in G: G/G′G/G' is abelian.