“ON COUNTING CENTRALIZERS IN FINITE

GROUPS”
ORVILLE B. BUELBAN

January 2008

Abstract
Let G be a finite group. If x ∈ G, then the centralizer of x in G,
denoted by C(x), is the set of all elements in G that commutes with
x. Denote the number of distinct centralizers in G by #Cent(G), that
is, #Cent(G) = |{C(x) : x ∈ G}|. Clearly, #Cent(G) = 1 if, and only
if, G is abelian, since C(x) = G for every x ∈ G. This study exposes
a portion of the papers of S.M. Belcastro and G.J. Sherman entitled
“Counting Centralizers in Finite Groups”, and M. Bruckheimer, et.al.,
entitled “Groups which are the Union of Three Subgroups. We prove
that for nonabelian groups, #Cent(G) ≥ 4, and #Cent(G) = 4, if, and
only if, G/C(G) ∼ = Z2 ⊕ Z2 . Moreover, #Cent(G) = 5, if, and only if,
G/C(G) ∼ = Z3 ⊕ Z3 .

1 Background of the Study

In this paper, the commutativity issue of a group is taken into con-

sideration and it puts its notion on a numerical basis. The general

idea of a centralizer of the element x in a group G leads to some

interesting results. Recall that the centralizer of x in G, denoted by

C(x), is the subgroup of G consisting of all elements that commute

with x; that is, C(x) = {y ∈ G : xy = yx}. A better way to deal

with this concept is to address it directly by asking “How many

1
distinct centralizers can a finite group have?” If #Cent(G) denotes

the number of distinct centralizers in G, then

#Cent(G) = |{C(x) : x ∈ G}|.

It is easy to see that if a finite group G is abelian, then C(x) = G for

each element x in G. In other words, if a finite group G is abelian,

then #Cent(G) = 1. Now, if a nonabelian group G is considered,

then what can be said about #Cent(G)? This question motivates

this paper to go for an excursion in elementary group theory.

2 Statement of the Problem

This paper aims to put the notion of commutativity of a finite group

on a numerical basis. That is, to determine the number of distinct

centralizers in a finite group.

3 Objectives of the Study

In order to determine the number of distinct centralizers in a finite

group, the following will be proven:

1. A finite group cannot be written as the union of two of its proper

subgroups.

2. A finite group can be written as the union of three proper

2
subgroups, H, K, and L if and only if, N = H ∩ K ∩ L is a

normal subgroup of G and G/N ∼

= Z2 ⊕ Z2 .

3.If G is not abelian, then #Cent(G) ≥ 4.

4.#Cent(G) = 4 if, and only if, G/C(G) ∼

= Z2 ⊕ Z2 ; that is, G

modulo its center C(G) is isomorphic to the Klein-4 group.

5.#Cent(G) = 5 if, and only if,G/C(G) ∼

= Z3 ⊕ Z3 or G/C(G) ∼
= S3

where S3 is a symmetric group on three symbols.

4 Scope and Limitations of the Study

This paper deals with the basic concepts and results purely from

abstract algebra as its very foundation. Althroughout, only finite

groups are treated. More particularly, this paper gives more focus

on nonabelian groups such as symmetric group, quaternion group,

and dihedral group. Basically, this includes no infinite group.

5 Significance of the Study

This paper is of remarkable importance as it will serve as a quick

reference for those ardent teachers and students of abstract algebra

and even for those researchers who are marked by intense interest

3
in studying finite groups. This also gives another way to deal with

the concept of commutativity of a group.

6 Methodology

The first part of chapter 3 is an exposition of a portion of the paper

of M. Bruckheimer, et.al., entitled “Groups which are the Union of

Three Subgroups” and the remaining part is an exposition of the pa-

per of Sarah Marie Belcastro and Gary J. Sherman on “On Counting

Centralizers in Finite Groups”. Basic definitions and concepts are

presented in chapter 2 to support the main results. Some of these

definitions and results are accompanied by examples to give clarity.