Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · math/9808094

How Tall is the Automorphism Tower of a Group?

Joel David Hamkins
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The automorphism tower of a group is obtained by computing its automorphism group, the automorphism group of THAT group and so on, iterating transfinitely. Each group maps into the next using inner automorphisms and one takes a direct limit at limit stages. The question is whether the process ever terminates in a fixed point, a group which is isomorphic to its automorphism group by the natural map. In this talk I will prove that every group has a terminating automorphism tower. After this, I will discuss the set-theoretic aspects of the height of the automorphism tower of a group, and sketch my recent proof with Simon Thomas that it is consistent to have a group whose automorphism tower is wildly modified by forcing; indeed, in various models of set theory the automorphism tower of this very same group can be almost arbitrarily specified.

Explore related subjects

math.LOmath.GR

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Joel David Hamkins. 1998-08-21. How Tall is the Automorphism Tower of a Group?. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9808094

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗