arXiv:1509.00906v3 [math.GT] 13 Sep 2016

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED
DANIEL ALLCOCK
Abstract. We give a simplified proof of J. A. Wolf’s classification
of finite groups that can act freely and isometrically on a round
sphere of some dimension. We slightly improve the classification
by removing some non-obvious redundancy. The groups are the
same as the Frobenius complements of finite group theory.

In chapters 4–7 of his famous Spaces of Constant Curvature [7], J. A.
Wolf classified the spherical space forms: connected Riemannian manifolds locally isometric to the n-sphere S n . By passing to the action of
the fundamental group on the universal covering space, this is equivalent to classifying the possible free isometric actions of finite groups
on S n . Then, by embedding S n in Euclidean space, this is equivalent
to classifying the real representations of finite groups that are “free”
in the sense that no element except the identity fixes any vector except 0. This allowed Wolf to use the theory of finite groups and their
representations.
Our first goal is to give a simplified proof of Wolf’s classification of
the finite groups G that can act freely and isometrically on spheres.
Wolf’s main result here was the list of presentations in theorems 6.1.11
and 6.3.1 of [7]. Our approach to Wolf’s theorem leads to the most
interesting example, the binary icosahedral group, with very little case
analysis and no character theory. (The trick consists of the equalities
(3.2) and (3.3) in the proof of lemma 3.11. These rely on an elementary
property of the binary tetrahedral group, stated in lemma 3.10.)
Our second goal is to remove the redundancy from Wolf’s list; this
modest improvement appears to be new. Some groups appear repeatedly on Wolf’s list because different presentations can define isomorphic
groups. See example 5.1 for some non-obvious isomorphisms. It would
not be hard to just work out the isomorphisms among the groups defined by Wolf’s presentations. But it is more natural to reformulate
the classification in terms of intrinsically defined subgroups. Namely,
Date: 9 September 2016.
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. 20B10(57S17, 57S25).
Key words and phrases. spherical space form, Frobenius complement.
Supported by NSF grant DMS-1101566.
1

2

DANIEL ALLCOCK

a finite group G acts freely and isometrically on a sphere if and only if
it has one of 6 possible “structures”, in which case it has a unique such
“structure” up to conjugation. See theorems 1.1 and 1.2. In fact we
parameterize the possible G without redundancy, in terms of a fairly
simple set of invariants. Namely: a type I–VI, two numbers |G| and a,
and a subgroup of the unit group of the ring Z/a. In a special case one
must also specify a second such subgroup. See section 5 for details.
The full classification of spherical space forms requires not just the
list of possible groups, but also their irreducible free actions on real
vector spaces, and how their outer automorphism groups permute these
representations. See [7, Thm 5.1.2] for why this is the right data to
tabulate and [7, Ch. 7] for the actual data for each group. We expect
that this data could be described cleanly in terms of our descriptions
of the groups, but have not worked out the details. It would remain
lengthy, because of many cases and subcases to consider.
For many authors the phrase “spherical space form” means a quotient of a sphere by a free action of a finite group of homeomorphisms
or diffeomorphisms, rather than isometries. In this paper we consider
only isometric actions on round spheres. See [6] for the rich topology
and group theory involved in the more general theory.
Expecting topologists and geometers rather than group theorists as
readers, we have made the paper self-contained, with three exceptions.
First, we omit proofs of Burnside’s transfer theorem and the SchurZassenhaus theorem. Second, we use the fact that SL2 (F5 ) is the unique
perfect central extension of the alternating group A5 by Z/2, giving a
citation when needed. Third, we use Aut SL2 (F5 ) = PGL2 (F5 ) ∼
= S5 ,
which is just an exercise.
Finite group theorists study the same groups Wolf did, from a different perspective. We will sketch the connection briefly because our
descriptions of the groups may have some value in this context. A
finite group G is called a Frobenius complement if it acts “freely” on
some finite group H, meaning that no element of G except 1 fixes any
element of H except 1. To our knowledge, the structure of Frobenius
complements (in terms of presentations) is due to Zassenhaus [8]. Unfortunately his paper contains an error, and the first correct proof is
due to Passman [5, Theorems 18.2 and 18.6]. See also Zassenhaus’ later
paper [9]. If G is a Frobenius complement, then after a preliminary reduction one can show that H may be taken to be a vector space over
a finite field Fp , where p is a prime not dividing |G|. Our arguments
apply with few or no changes; see remark 3.12 and also [4], especially
Prop. 2.1.

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

3

We will continue to abuse language by speaking of free actions on
vector spaces when really we mean that the action is free away from 0.
We will use the standard notation G′ for the commutator subgroup
of a group G, and O(G) for the unique maximal-under-inclusion odd
normal subgroup when G is finite.
We will also use ATLAS notation for group structures [1]. That is,
if a group G has a normal subgroup A, the quotient by which is B,
then we may say “G has structure A.B”. We sometimes write this
as G ∼ A.B. This usually does not completely describe G, because
several nonisomorphic groups may have “structure A.B”. Nevertheless
it is a helpful shorthand, especially if A is characteristic. If the group
extension splits then we may write A : B instead, and if it doesn’t then
we may write A · B. See theorem 1.1 for a some examples. When we
write A : B, we will regard B as a subgroup of G rather than just a
quotient. (In all our uses of this notation, the complements to A turn
out to be conjugate, so there is no real ambiguity in choosing one of
them.)
I am very grateful to the referee for catching a serious error in an
earlier version of this paper.
1. The groups
It is well-known that the groups of orientation-preserving isometries
of the tetrahedron, octahedron (or cube) and icosahedron (or dodecahedron) are subgroups of SO(3) isomorphic to A4 , S4 and A5 . The
preimages of these groups in the double cover of SO(3) are called the
binary tetrahedral, binary octahedral and binary icosahedral groups.
They have structures 2.A4 , 2.S4 and 2.A5 , where we are using another
ATLAS convention: indicating a cyclic group of order n by simply
writing n; here n is 2. These are the only groups with these structures
that we will encounter in this paper. So we abbreviate them (again
following the ATLAS) to 2A4 , 2S4 and 2A5 , and specify that this notation refers to the binary polyhedral groups, rather than some other
groups with structure 2.A4 , 2.S4 or 2.A5 . Alternate descriptions of the
binary tetrahedral and binary icosahedral groups are 2A4 ∼
= SL2 (3) and
2A5 ∼
= SL2 (5).
It is also well-known that the double cover of SO(3) may be identified
with the unit sphere H∗ in Hamilton’s quaternions H. A finite subgroup
of H∗ obviously acts by left multiplication on H∗ . So 2A4 , 2S4 and 2A5
act freely on the unit sphere S 3 .
Similarly, SO(3) contains dihedral subgroups, and their preimages
in H∗ are called binary dihedral. If we start with the dihedral group

4

DANIEL ALLCOCK

of order 2n, then the corresponding binary dihedral group of order 4n
can be presented by
x, y x2n = 1, yxy −1 = x−1 , y 2 = xn .
This group may be identified with a subgroup of H∗ by taking
(1.1)

x 7→ (any primitive 2nth root of unity in R ⊕ Ri)

y 7→ j.

Left multiplication by these elements of H gives a free action on S 3 .
(Replacing the root of unity by its inverse gives an equivalent representation.) Restricting to the case n = 2m−2 , m ≥ 3, one obtains the
quaternion group Q2m of order 2m . Some authors call this a generalized
quaternion group, with “quaternion group” reserved for Q8 .
Now we can state our version of Wolf’s theorems 6.1.11 and 6.3.1,
supplemented by a uniqueness theorem. An n-element of a group means
an element of order n.
∗

Theorem 1.1 (Groups that act freely and isometrically on spheres).
Suppose G is a finite group that acts freely and isometrically on a sphere
of some dimension. Then it has one of the following six structures,
where A and B are cyclic groups whose orders are odd and coprime,
every nontrivial Sylow subgroup of B acts nontrivially on A, and every
prime-order element of B acts trivially on A.

(I) A : B × (a cyclic 2-group T ) , where if T 6= 1 then its involution fixes A pointwise.

(II) A : B × (a quaternionic group T ) .
(III) (Q8 × A) : (Θ × B), where Θ is a cyclic 3-group which acts
nontrivially on Q8 and whose 3-elements centralize A, and |A|
and |B| are prime to 3.
(IV) (Q8 ×A) : (Θ×B) ·2, where Θ, |A| and |B| are as in (III), and
the quotient Z/2 is the image of a subgroup Φ of G, isomorphic
to Z/4, whose 4-elements act by an outer automorphism on Q8 ,
by inversion on Θ and trivially on B.
(V) 2A5 × (A : B) where
|A| and |B| are prime to 15.

(VI) 2A5 × (A : B) · 2, where |A| and |B| are prime to 15, and the
quotient Z/2 is the image of a subgroup Φ of G, isomorphic to
Z/4, whose 4-elements act by an outer automorphism on 2A5
and trivially on B.
Conversely, any group with one of these structures acts freely and isometrically on a sphere of some dimension.
These groups are parameterized in terms of simple invariants in theorem 5.3. A binary dihedral group has type I or II, 2A4 has type III,
2S4 has type IV, and 2A5 has type V.

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

5

Theorem 1.2 (Uniqueness of structure). The structure in theorem 1.1
is unique, in the following sense:
(1) Groups of different types I–VI cannot be isomorphic.
(2) Suppose G has one of the types I–VI, with respect to some subgroups A, B (and whichever of T , Q8 , Θ, Φ and 2A5 are relevant), and also with respect to some subgroups A∗ , B ∗ (and T ∗ ,
Q∗8 , Θ∗ , Φ∗ and 2A∗5 , when relevant). Then some element of G
conjugates every unstarred group to the corresponding starred
group. In particular, A∗ = A (and Q∗8 = Q8 and 2A∗5 = 2A5 ,
when relevant).
Remark 1.3 (Correspondence with Wolf’s types). Our types correspond
in the obvious way to Wolf’s in theorems 6.1.11 and 6.3.1 of [7]. However, his generator A might not generate our subgroup A and his generator B might not even lie in our subgroup B.
Remark 1.4 (Implied relations). Some useful information is implicit.
For example, B acts trivially on Q8 for types III and IV, because Q8
has no automorphisms of odd order > 3. Also, Θ must act trivially on
A for type IV, because A has abelian automorphism group and Θ ≤ G′ .
In light of these remarks,
 one could rewrite G’s structure for type IV
as (Q8 : Θ) × (A : B) · 2. This would be more informative, but hide
the relationship to type III.
In all cases, G has at most one involution. This is obvious except
for type II. Then, T ’s central involution lies in T ′ , which centralizes A
because Aut A is abelian.
At this point we will prove the easy parts of the theorems, namely
that the listed groups do act freely on spheres, and that groups of
different types cannot be isomorphic. The proof that every group acting
freely on a sphere has structure as in theorem 1.1 appears in sections 3–
4, and theorem 1.2’s uniqueness statement is a byproduct of the proof.
Proof of “Conversely. . .” in theorem 1.1. Define H as the normal subgroup of G that is generated by the elements of prime order. We claim:
if H has a free action on a real vector space V , then G acts freely on its
representation W induced from V . To see this, recall that as a vector
space, W is a direct sum of copies of V , indexed by G/H. And H’s
actions on these copies of V are isomorphic to the representations got
by precomposing H → GL(V ) by automorphisms H → H arising from
conjugation in G. In particular, H acts freely on W . We claim that
G also acts freely on W . Otherwise, some prime-order element of G
would have a fixed point. But it would also lie in H, which acts freely.

6

DANIEL ALLCOCK

Now it suffices to determine H and show that it always has a free
action. For types I–II, H is a cyclic group, and for types V–VI it is
2A5 ×(cyclic group of order prime to 30). For types III–IV, H is either
cyclic or 2A4 ×(cyclic group of order prime to 6), according to whether
|Θ| > 3 or |Θ| = 3. These claims are all easy, using the facts that G’s
involution is central (if one exists) and the prime-order elements of B
and (if relevant) Θ act trivially on A.
Cyclic groups obviously admit free actions. For a product of 2A4 or
2A5 by a cyclic group of coprime order, we identify each factor with a
subgroup of H∗ and make 2A4 or 2A5 act on H by left multiplication and
the cyclic group act by right multiplication. If there were a nonidentity
element of this group with a nonzero fixed vector, then there would be
one having prime order, hence lying in one of the factors. But this is
impossible since each factor acts freely.

Proof of theorem 1.2(1). Suppose G has one of the types I–VI. Then
the subgroup H generated by A, B and the index 3 subgroup of Θ (for
types III–IV) is normal in G and has odd order. The quotient G/H
is a cyclic 2-group, a quaternionic group, 2A4 , 2A4 · 2, 2A5 or 2A5 · 2
respectively. None of these has an odd normal subgroup larger than
{1}. Therefore H is all of O(G), and the isomorphism class of G/O(G)
distinguishes the types.

2. Preparation
In this section we suppose G is a finite group. We will establish general
properties of G under hypotheses related to G having a free action on
a sphere. The results before lemma 2.8 are standard, and included for
completeness. Lemma 2.8 is a refinement of a standard result.
Lemma 2.1 (Unique involution). Suppose G has a free action on a
sphere. Then it has at most one involution.
Proof. Choose a free (hence faithful) action of G on a real vector
space V . An involution has eigenvalues ±1, but +1 cannot appear by
freeness. So there can be only one involution, acting by negation. 
Lemma 2.2. Suppose G has a free action on a sphere. Then every
abelian subgroup is cyclic, and so is every subgroup of order pq, where
p and q are primes.
Proof. Fix a free action of G on a real vector space V , and let VC be its
complexification. G also acts freely on VC . Otherwise, some nontrivial
element has a nonzero fixed vector, hence has the real number 1 as an
eigenvalue, hence fixes a nonzero real vector.

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

7

Now suppose A ≤ G is abelian, and decompose VC under A as a
sum of 1-dimensional representations. By freeness, each of these is
faithful. So A is a subgroup of the multiplicative group C − {0}, hence
cyclic, proving the first claim. Since any group of prime-squared order
is abelian, this also proves the p = q case of the second claim.
So suppose p < q are primes and consider a subgroup of G with
order pq; by discarding the rest of G we may suppose without loss that
this subgroup is all of G. Write P resp. Q for a Sylow p-subgroup resp.
q-subgroup. By Sylow’s theorem, P normalizes Q. If it acts trivially
on Q then G is abelian, so suppose P acts nontrivially on Q.
For purposes of this proof, a character of Q means a homomorphism
Q → C∗ . It is standard that any complex representation of Q is the
direct sum of Q’s character spaces, meaning the subspaces on which Q
acts by its various characters. Fix a character χ of Q whose character
space contains a nonzero vector v ∈ VC ; χ is faithful since Q acts freely
on VC . If g ∈ P then g(v) lies in the character space for the character
∗
−1
χ ◦ i−1
means conjugation by g. Since
g : Q → C , where ig : x 7→ gxg
−1
χ is faithful, and P acts faithfully on Q, the various
P characters χ ◦ ig
are all distinct. Therefore the terms in the sum g∈P g(v) are linearly
independent, so the sum is nonzero. But this contradicts freeness since
the sum is obviously P -invariant.

Lemma 2.3 (Sylow subgroups). Suppose all of G’s abelian subgroups
are cyclic. Then its odd Sylow subgroups are cyclic, and its Sylow 2subgroups are cyclic or quaternionic.
Proof. It suffices to treat the case of G a p-group, say of order pn . We
proceed by induction on n, with the cases n ≤ 2 being trivial. So
suppose n > 2.
First we treat the special case that G contains a cyclic group X of
index p. If G acts trivially on X then G is abelian, hence cyclic. So
we may assume that G/X is identified with a subgroup of order p in
Aut X. Recall that Aut X is cyclic of order (p − 1)pn−2 if p is odd, and
Z/2 times a cyclic group of order 2n−3 if p = 2. This shows that some
y ∈ G − X acts on X by the λth power map, where
(
pn−2 + 1
if p is odd
λ=
n−2
−1 or 2
± 1 if p = 2,
with the possibilities 2n−2 ±1 considered only if n > 3. Write X0 for the
subgroup of X centralized by y. Now, hX0 , yi is abelian, hence cyclic.
The index of its subgroup X0 is p, because y p lies in X and centralizes
y. Since y ∈
/ X0 , y generates hX0 , yi. We write pt for the index of X0

8

DANIEL ALLCOCK

in X, which can be worked out from y’s action on X. Namely,
(
2n−2 if p = 2, and λ = −1 or 2n−2 − 1
pt =
p
otherwise
t

We choose a generator x for X such that y p = x−p .
Since xy and y have the same centralizer in X, the same argument
shows that (xy)p also generates X0 . Now,
(xy)p = x(yxy −1)(y 2xy −2 ) · · · (y p−1xy 1−p )y p
2

p−1

= x · xλ · xλ · · · xλ

t

· x−p .

Our two descriptions hy pi and h(xy)p i of X0 ≤ X ∼
= Z/pn−1 must
coincide, so µ := 1 + λ + · · · + λp−1 − pt generates the same subgroup
of Z/pn−1 as pt does. One computes
pt
p
2n−2
2n−2

µ
 n−2
p
if λ = pn−2 + 1 (including the case 2n−2 + 1)
0
if λ = 2n−2 − 1
n−2
2
if λ = −1
p
2

Only in the last case do pt and µ generate the same subgroup of Z/pn−1 .
So p = 2, y inverts X, and y 2 is the involution in X. That is, G is
quaternionic. This finishes the proof in the special case.
Now we treat the general case. Take H to be a subgroup of index p.
If p is odd then H is cyclic by induction, so the special case shows
that G is cyclic too. So suppose p = 2. By induction, H is cyclic or
quaternionic. If it is cyclic then the special case shows that G is cyclic
or quaternionic, as desired. So suppose H is quaternionic and take
X to be a G-invariant index 2 cyclic subgroup of H. This is possible
because H contains an odd number of cyclic subgroups of index 2 (three
if H ∼
= Q8 and one otherwise). Now we consider the action of G/X on
X. If some element of G − X acts trivially then together with X it
generates an abelian, hence cyclic, group, and the special case applies.
So G/X is 2 × 2 or 4 and embeds in Aut X. (These cases require
|X| ≥ 8 or 16 respectively, or equivalently n ≥ 5 or 6.) Furthermore,
Aut X contains just three involutions, and only one of them can be
a square in Aut X, namely the (1 + 2n−2 )nd power map. Therefore,
either possibility for G/X yields an element y of G which acts on X
by this map and has square in X. But then hX, yi is neither cyclic nor
quaternionic, contradicting the special case.

Recall that a group is called perfect if its abelianization is trivial.

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

9

Lemma 2.4 (2A5 recognition). Suppose G is perfect with center Z/2,
and every noncentral cyclic subgroup has binary dihedral normalizer.
Then G ∼
= 2A5 .
Proof. Write 2g for |G|. The hypothesis on normalizers shows that distinct maximal cyclic subgroups of G have intersection equal to Z(G).
So G is the disjoint union of Z(G) and the subsets C − Z(G) where
C varies over the maximal cyclic subgroups of G. We choose representatives C1 , . . . , Cn for the conjugacy classes of such subgroups and
write 2c1 , . . . , 2cn for their orders. The numbers c1 , . . . , cn are pairwise
coprime because each of C1 , . . . , Cn is the centralizer of each of its subgroups of order > 2. We number the Ci so that c1 is divisible by 2, c2 is
divisible by the smallest prime involved in g but not c1 , c3 is divisible
by the smallest prime involved in g but neither c1 nor c2 , and so on.
In particular, ci is at least as large as the ith prime number.
Each conjugate of Ci −Z(G) has 2ci −2 elements, and the normalizer
hypothesis tells us there are g/2ci many conjugates. Therefore (2ci −
2)g/2ci = g 1 − c1i elements of G −Z(G) are conjugate into Ci −Z(G).
Our partition of G gives
n
X
(2.1)
2g = 2 + g
(1 − c1i )
i=1

P
We can rewrite this as g(2−n) = 2− ni=1 g/ci . Since G has no index 2
subgroups, each term g/ci in the sum is larger than 2. Since the right
side is negative, g(2 − n) is also. So n > 2.
In fact n = 3. Otherwise, we would use c1 ≥ 2, c2 ≥ 3, c3 ≥ 5, c4 ≥ 7
to see that the sum on the right side of (2.1) is
(at least 12 ) + (at least 32 ) + (at least 45 ) + (at least 76 ) + · · · > 2

which is a contradiction. Now we rewrite (2.1) as c11 + c12 + c13 =
1 + 2/g. In particular, the left side must be larger than 1, which
requires c1 = 2, c2 = 3, c3 = 5. Then 21 + 13 + 15 = 1 + 2/g gives a
formula for g, namely g = 60, so |G| = 120. So G/Z(G) is nonsolvable
of order 60. A Sylow’s theorem exercise rules out the possibility that
there are 15 Sylow 2-subgroups, so there must be 5, and it follows easily
that G/Z(G) ∼
= A5 . So G has structure 2.A5 . Finally, A5 has a unique
perfect central extension by Z/2, namely the binary icosahedral group
[5, Prop. 13.7].

Theorem 2.5 (Burnside’s transfer theorem). Suppose G is a finite
group, and P is a Sylow subgroup that is central in its normalizer.
Then P maps faithfully to the abelianization G/G′ .

10

DANIEL ALLCOCK

Proof. [3, Thm. 5.13], [2, Thm. 4.3] or [7, Thm 5.2.9].



Corollary 2.6 (Cyclic transfer). Suppose G is a finite group, p is a
prime, and G’s Sylow p-subgroups are cyclic. If some nontrivial p-group
is central in its normalizer, or maps nontrivially to G/G′ , then every
Sylow p-subgroup maps faithfully to G/G′ . In particular, this holds if
p is the smallest prime dividing |G|.
Proof. Suppose that P0 ≤ G is a p-group satisfying either of the two
conditions, and choose a Sylow p-subgroup P containing it. It is cyclic
by hypothesis, so P0 is characteristic in P , so N(P ) lies in N(P0 ). The
automorphisms of P with order prime to p act nontrivially on every
nontrivial subquotient of P . Under either hypothesis, P0 (hence P )
has a nontrivial subquotient on which N(P ) acts trivially. Therefore
the image of N(P ) in Aut P contains no elements of order prime to p.
It contains no elements of order p either, since P is abelian. So P is
central in its normalizer and we can apply Burnside’s transfer theorem.
Since P maps faithfully to G/G′ , so does every Sylow p-subgroup.
For the final statement, observe that Aut P has no elements of prime
order > p. So its normalizer must act trivially on it, and we can apply
the previous paragraph.

Theorem 2.7 (Schur-Zassenhaus). Suppose G is a group, N is a normal subgroup, and |N| and |G/N| are coprime. Then there exists a
complement to N in G, and all complements are conjugate.

As stated, this relies on the odd order theorem. But we only need
the much more elementary case that N is abelian (Theorem 3.5 of [3]).
In determining the structure of his groups, Wolf used a theorem of
Burnside: if all Sylow subgroups of a given group H are cyclic, then
H ′ and H/H ′ are cyclic of coprime order, H ′ has a complement, and
all complements are conjugate. We prefer the following decomposition
H = A : B because of its “persistence” property (4). We only need
this property for the imperfect case (section 4).
Lemma 2.8 (Metacyclic decomposition). Suppose H is a finite group,
all of whose Sylow subgroups are cyclic. Define A as the subgroup
generated by H ′ and all of H’s Sylow subgroups that are central. Then
A has the following two properties and is characterized by them:
(1) A is normal, and A and H/A are cyclic of coprime orders.
(2) Every nontrivial Sylow subgroup of H/A acts nontrivially on A.
Furthermore,
(3) A has a complement B, and all complements are conjugate.

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

11

(4) Suppose a finite group G contains H as a normal subgroup,
with |G/H| coprime to |H|. Then there is a complement C to
H, such that the decomposition H ∼ A : B in (3) extends to
G ∼ A : (B × C). Furthermore, all complements of H that
normalize B are conjugate under NH (B).
Proof. First we show that H is solvable. If p is the smallest prime
dividing |H|, and P is a Sylow p-subgroup, then corollary 2.6 shows
that H has a quotient group isomorphic to P . The kernel is solvable
by induction, so H is too.
Now let F be the Fitting subgroup of H, i.e., the unique maximal
normal nilpotent subgroup. Being nilpotent, it is the product of its
Sylow subgroups. Since these are cyclic, so is F . Also, H/F acts
faithfully on F , for otherwise F would lie in a strictly larger normal
nilpotent subgroup. As a subgroup of the abelian group Aut F , H/F
is abelian. Therefore the cyclic group F contains H ′, so H ′ is cyclic.
If p is a prime dividing the order of H/H ′ , then corollary 2.6 shows
that every Sylow p-subgroup meets H ′ trivially. It follows that the
orders of H ′ and H/H ′ are coprime. A is obviously normal. Since A
is the product of H ′ with the central Sylow subgroups of H, we see
that A and H/A also have coprime orders. Since A contains H ′ , H/A
is abelian. Having cyclic Sylow subgroups, H/A is cyclic. We have
proven (1).
Because |A| and |H/A| are coprime, the Schur-Zassenhaus theorem
assures us that A has a complement B, and that all complements are
conjugate, proving (3). For (2), suppose a Sylow subgroup of B acts
trivially on A. Then it is central in H, so A contains it by definition,
which is a contradiction.
Next we prove the “persistence” property (4), so we assume its hypotheses. Since A is characteristic in H, it is normal in G. Since all
complements to A in H are conjugate in A, the Frattini argument shows
that NG (B) maps onto G/H. Applying the Schur-Zassenhaus theorem
to NH (B) inside NG (B) yields a complement C to H that normalizes
B. That theorem also shows that all such complements are conjugate
under NH (B)
To prove (4) it remains only to show that B and C commute. If C
acted nontrivially on B, then G′ would contain a nontrivial p-group for
some prime p dividing |B|. Using corollary 2.6 as before, it follows that
G′ contains a Sylow p-subgroup P of B. Since P lies in the commutator
subgroup of G, it must act trivially on A. This contradicts (2). So B
and C commute, completing the proof of (4). (Remark: since NH (B) =
CA (B)×B, we could replace NH (B) in the statement of (4) by CA (B).)

12

DANIEL ALLCOCK

All that remains is to show that (1) and (2) characterize A; suppose
A∗ ≤ H has these properties. By (2), all the Sylow subgroups of H that
act trivially on A∗ lie in A∗ . Since A∗ is cyclic, Aut A∗ is abelian, so
H ′ acts trivially on it. We already saw that H ′ is the product of some
of H’s Sylow subgroups, so H ′ lies in A∗ . The central Sylow subgroups
of H also act trivially on A∗ , so also lie in A∗ . We have shown that A∗
contains A. If A∗ were strictly larger than A, then the coprimality of
|A∗ | and |H/A∗ | would show that A∗ contains a Sylow subgroup of H
that is not in A. But then A∗ is nonabelian by property (2) of A, and
therefore property (1) fails for A∗ .

3. The perfect case
In this section and the next we prove theorems 1.1 and 1.2 inductively.
We suppose throughout that G is a finite group that acts freely on a
sphere of some dimension. Under the assumption that every proper
subgroup has one of the structures listed in theorem 1.1, we will prove
that G also has such a structure. In this section we also assume G is
perfect. This includes base case G = 1 of the induction, which occurs in
case I. The only other perfect group in theorem 1.1 is 2A5 . Theorem 1.2
is trivial for G ∼
= 2A5
= 1 or 2A5 . Therefore it will suffice to prove G ∼
under the assumption G 6= 1.
Lemma 3.1. G’s Sylow 2-subgroups are quaternionic, in particular
nontrivial.
Proof. By lemma 2.3, all the odd Sylow subgroups are cyclic. If the
Sylow 2-subgroups were too, then corollary 2.6, applied to the smallest
prime dividing |G|, would contradict perfectness. Now lemma 2.3 shows
that the Sylow 2-subgroups must be quaternionic.

Lemma 3.2. G’s 4-elements form a single conjugacy class.
Proof. Let T be a Sylow 2-subgroup (quaternionic by the previous
lemma) and U a cyclic subgroup of index 2. We consider the action of
G on the coset space G/U, whose order is twice an odd number. By
lemma 2.1, G contains a unique involution, necessarily central. Since it
lies in every conjugate of U, it acts trivially on G/U. Now let φ be any
4-element. Since its square acts trivially, φ acts by exchanging some
points in pairs. Since G is perfect, φ must act by an even permutation,
so the number of these pairs is even. Since the size of G/U is not divisible by 4, φ must fix some points. The stabilizers of these points are
conjugates of U, so φ is conjugate into U. Finally, the two 4-elements
in U are conjugate since T contains an element inverting U.


SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

13

Lemma 3.3. O(G) = 1.
Proof. Suppose otherwise. Since G’s odd Sylow subgroups are cyclic,
lemma 2.8(1) shows that O(G) has a characteristic cyclic subgroup of
prime order. Because this subgroup has abelian automorphism group,
and G is perfect, G acts trivially on it. Now corollary 2.6 shows that
G has nontrivial abelianization, contradicting perfectness.

Lemma 3.4. Every maximal subgroup M of G has center of order 2.
Proof. First, M contains G’s central involution. Otherwise, adjoining
it to M would yield G by maximality. Then G would have an index 2
subgroup, contrary to perfectness. Next we show that M has no central
subgroup Y of order 4; suppose it did. By the conjugacy of Z/4’s in
G, and the fact that G’s Sylow 2-subgroups are quaternionic, N(Y )
contains an element inverting Y . So N(Y ) is strictly larger than M,
hence coincides with G, and the map G → Aut(Y ) ∼
= Z/2 is nontrivial,
contrary to perfectness.
Finally we show that M has no central subgroup Y of odd prime
order > 1. The previous lemma shows that N(Y ) is strictly smaller
than G. Since M normalizes Y and is maximal, it is Y ’s full normalizer.
Since Y is central in M, we see that N(Y ) acts trivially on Y . Now
corollary 2.6 shows that G/G′ is nontrivial, contradicting perfectness.

The next lemma is where our development diverges from Wolf’s.
Lemma 3.5 (Maximal subgroups). Every maximal subgroup M of G
has one of the following structures, with O(M) a cyclic group.
(I) O(M) : (cyclic 2-group of order > 2)
(II) O(M) : (quaternionic group)
(III) 2A4

(IV) O(M).2A4 · 2 where the elements of M outside O(M).2A4 act
on O(M) by inversion and on the quotient 2A4 by outer automorphisms.
(V) 2A5

(VI) O(M) × 2A5 · 2 where the elements of M outside O(M)×2A5
act on O(M) by inversion and on 2A5 by outer automorphisms.
The G-normalizer of any nontrivial subgroup of O(M) is M. If M1
and M2 are non-conjugate maximal subgroups, then O(M1 ) and O(M2 )
have coprime orders.
Proof. By induction, M has one of the structures in theorem 1.1. In
light of the previous lemma, we keep only those with center of order 2.
Here are the details. In every case, the prime order elements of B are

14

DANIEL ALLCOCK

central in M, so they cannot exist, so B = 1. For types I–II this leaves
O(M) = A and establishes our claimed structure for M. For type I
we must also show that the cyclic 2-group, call it T , has order > 2.
Otherwise, A is central in M, hence trivial, so T is all of M and has
order 2. That is, the center of G is a maximal subgroup of G, which is
a contradiction because no group can have this property.
For type V we have shown M ∼ 2A5 ×A, so A is central, hence trivial.
For type III we know M ∼ (Q8 × A) : Θ, with Θ’s 3-elements centralizing A. It follows that |Θ| = 3, because otherwise Θ’s 3-elements would
also centralize Q8 , hence be central in M. From |Θ| = 3 it follows
that A is central in M, hence trivial. So M ∼ Q8 : 3 with the Z/3
acting nontrivially on Q8 . Since Aut(Q8 ) ∼
= S4 has a unique class of
3-elements, M is determined up to isomorphism, namely M ∼
= 2A4 .
For type VI we know M ∼ (2A5 × A) · 2 and O(M) = A. Also, A
decomposes as the direct sum of its subgroup inverted by the nontrivial
element t of M/(2A5 × A) ∼
= Z/2 and its subgroup fixed pointwise by t.
The latter subgroup is central in M, hence trivial, so t inverts A as
claimed. Also, t’s image in Out 2A5 is nontrivial by the definition of
type VI groups.

Finally, for type IV we have M ∼ (Q8 × A) : Θ · 2. By remark 1.4,
Θ and A commute. So O(M) is cyclic and generated by A and the
index 3 subgroup of Θ, leaving M ∼ (O(M).2A4 ) · 2. By the argument
for type VI, the elements of M mapping nontrivially to Z/2 must invert
O(M) and act on Q8 by outer automorphisms.
We have shown in each case that O(M) is cyclic. So its subgroups
are characteristic in O(M), hence normal in M. By lemma 3.3 and
maximality, M is the full normalizer of any nontrivial subgroup of
O(M). For the last claim of the theorem, suppose a prime p divides
the orders of O(M1 ) and O(M2 ). We have just shown that M1 is the
normalizer of a cyclic group of order p, and that M2 is the normalizer
of another. These cyclic groups are G-conjugate, so M1 and M2 are
also.

Lemma 3.6 (Done if Q16 6≤ G). Suppose the Sylow 2-subgroups of G
have order 8. Then G ∼
= 2A5 .
Proof. Suppose M is a maximal subgroup of G. It cannot have type
IV or VI, because these contain copies of Q16 . If M has type III or V
then M ∼
= 2A4 or 2A5 by lemma 3.5. We claim that in the remaining
cases, M is binary dihedral.
If M has type I then it has structure O(M) : T where T is a cyclic
group of order ≥ 4. Since this is the largest a cyclic 2-group in G can
be, T has order exactly 4. A generator for it must negate O(M), or else

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

15

M’s center would have order > 2. We have shown that M is binary
dihedral.
Now suppose M has type II, hence structure O(M) : Q where Q ∼
=
Q
,
which
is
binary
dihedral
as
claimed.
So
Q8 . If O(M) = 1 then M ∼
= 8
suppose O(M) 6= 1 and let P be any Sylow subgroup of O(M). Since
Aut P is cyclic, and Q/Q′ ∼
= 2 × 2, some 4-element of Q acts trivially
on P . Since all 4-elements are conjugate, the centralizer of any one
of them has order divisible by |P |. Now fix a particular 4-element φ.
Letting P vary over all Sylow subgroups of O(M) shows that C(φ) has
order divisible by |O(M)|. The only maximal subgroup of G that could
contain a cyclic group of order 4 · |O(M)| is M, up to conjugacy. So
after conjugation we may suppose that O(M) ≤ C(φ) ≤ M. We have
shown that some 4-element φ of Q centralizes O(M). So Q acts on
O(M) via a quotient group of order ≤ 2. This quotient must be Z/2,
acting by negation, because otherwise M would have center larger than
Z/2. It follows that M is binary dihedral.
We have shown that every maximal subgroup of M is binary dihedral,
binary tetrahedral or binary icosahedral. By examining normalizers in
these groups, one checks that every noncentral cyclic subgroup of G
has binary dihedral normalizer. So G ∼

= 2A5 by lemma 2.4.
To prove the perfect case of theorems 1.1 and 1.2, it now suffices to
rule out the case Q16 ≤ G. We devote the rest of this section to this.
Lemma 3.7 (Z/4 normalizers). For any subgroup Φ ∼
= Z/4 of G, N(Φ)
has structure (odd group).(Sylow 2-subgroup of G).
Proof. We claim first that N(Φ) has structure (odd group).(2-group).
Choosing a maximal subgroup M containing N(Φ), it suffices to show
that NM (Φ) has this structure. To prove this one considers each possible structure for M listed in lemma 3.5, and each subgroup Z/4 of it.
To finish the proof we use the facts that some Z/4 is normal in some
Sylow 2-subgroup, and that all Z/4’s are conjugate.

Lemma 3.8 (Q8 normalizers). Suppose G contains a copy of Q16 .
Choose Q ≤ G isomorphic to Q8 and write N for its normalizer. Then

(1) N ∼ O(N).2A4 · 2.
(2) Q lies in a group 2A4 if and only if 3 ∤ |O(N)|.
(3) G has more than one conjugacy class of Q8 subgroups.
(4) G contains a subgroup 2A4 .
Proof. (1) We begin by exhibiting some elements of N. Choose any
subgroup Φ ∼
= Z/4 of Q. There exists a Sylow 2-subgroup of N(Φ)
that contains Q. So Q lies in some Q16 that normalizes Φ. This Q16

16

DANIEL ALLCOCK

contains an element that inverts Φ and exchanges the other two Z/4
subgroups of Q. We have shown that N contains an element that
normalizes our chosen Z/4 and exchanges the other two Z/4’s in Q. It
follows that N acts by S3 on the three Z/4 subgroups of Q.
Now we fix a maximal subgroup M of G that contains N. The
property of N just established
 forces M to have type IV or VI. That is,
M ∼ O(M).(2A4 or 2A5 ) ·2 with Q lying in the index 2 subgroup M ′ .
In either case, N coincides with NM (Q), which has the stated structure.
Also, O(N) = O(M), which we will use later in the proof.
(2) “If” follows from the existence of Sylow 3-subgroup, isomorphic
to Z/3, in N. For “only if”, suppose 3 divides |O(N)|. Then N cannot
contains any 2A4 , because all its 3-elements are central in N.
(3) Fix Φ ≤ Q isomorphic to Z/4. By lemma 3.7 there is a subgroup
Q∗ ∼
= Q8 of N(Φ) that is not N(Φ)-conjugate to Q. We claim that
∗
Q is not G-conjugate to Q either; suppose to the contrary that some
g ∈ G conjugates Q∗ to Q. By Φ ≤ Q∗ we see that g sends Φ into Q.
By replacing g by its composition with an element of N that sends Φg
back to Φ, we may suppose without loss that g normalizes Φ. That is,
Q and Q∗ are conjugate in N(Φ), which is a contradiction.
(4) Supposing that G contains no 2A4 , we will show that every subgroup Q∗ ∼
= Q8 of G is conjugate to Q, which contradicts (3). Applying
the argument for (1) to Q∗ , we write N ∗ for its normalizer and M ∗ for
a maximal subgroup containing N ∗ . By (2) and the nonexistence of
2A4 ’s, 3 divides the orders of O(N) and O(N ∗ ). These groups are the
same as O(M) and O(M ∗ ). Since |O(M)| and |O(M ∗ )| have a common
factor, the last part of lemma 3.5 shows that M and M ∗ are conjugate.
So their index two subgroups M ′ and M ∗ ′ are conjugate, both of which
have structure (odd group).(2A4 or 2A5 ). Since Q resp. Q∗ is a Sylow
2-subgroup of M ′ resp. M ∗ ′ , it follows that Q and Q∗ are conjugate. 
Lemma 3.9 (Free actions of binary dihedral groups). Suppose H is
a binary dihedral group, U is an irreducible fixed-point-free real representation of H, and α is the natural map R[H] → End(U). Then
α(R[H]) ∼
= H. Furthermore, if J is any binary dihedral subgroup of H,
then α(R[J]) = α(R[H]).
Proof. It is easy to see that the lemma holds for the representations
(1.1), using their description in terms of H. So it will suffice to show
that U is one of them. Let C be an index 2 cyclic subgroup of H.
Under C, U decomposes as a direct sum of 2-dimensional spaces, on
each of which C acts faithfully by rotations. Fix one, say T , and consider the induced representation IndH
C (T ), of dimension 4. Its canonical
image in U is H-invariant, hence all of U. This image is larger than

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

17

2-dimensional, because a binary dihedral group has no 2-dimensional
free real representations. (Every finite subgroup of O(2) is cyclic or
dihedral.) Therefore V ∼
= IndH
C (T ). And the representations in (1.1)
are exactly the H-representations of this form.

Lemma 3.10 (Free actions of the binary tetrahedral group). Assume
A∼
= 2A4 acts freely on a real vector space V , and write Q for the copy
of Q8 in A. Then the image of R[A] in End(V ) is isomorphic to H and
equal to the image of R[Q]. In particular, every Q-invariant subspace
is also A-invariant.
Proof. Fix an identification of A with

(3.1)
2A4 = ±1, ±i, ±j, ±k, (±1 ± i ± j ± k)/2 ⊆ H∗

We claim that A has a unique irreducible free real representation. It
follows that V is a direct sum of copies of A’s left-multiplication action
on H, which proves the lemma.
For the claim, fix an irreducible free A-module U. Choose a Q-submodule T which is Q-irreducible. In the proof of lemma 3.9 we showed
that (1.1) accounts for all irreducible free actions of binary dihedral
groups. For Q8 , there was only one. So we may identify T with the real
vector space underlying H, with Q = {±1, ±i, ±j, ±k} ⊆ A acting by
left multiplication. The image of the natural map IndA
Q (T ) → U is AA
invariant, hence all of U. By definition, IndQ (T ) is the real vector space
underlying H3 , with i ∈ Q acting by (x, y, z) 7→ (ix, jy, kz), similarly
with i, j, k cyclically permuted, and θ := (−1+i+j+k)/2 ∈ A acting by
(x, y, z) 7→ (z, x, y). Obviously the kernel of IndA
Q (T ) → U contains the
fixed points of the nonidentity elements of A. For θ and i ◦ θ these are
{(x, x, x)} and {(x, jx, −ix)}, which together span an 8-dimensional
subspace, hence the whole kernel. This proves the uniqueness of U:
it is the quotient of IndA
Q (T ) by the subspace generated by the fixed
points of the nonidentity elements of A.

Lemma 3.11 (The final contradiction). G contains no subgroup Q16 .
Proof. Suppose otherwise, and fix an irreducible fixed-point free real
representation V of G. We write α for the natural map R[G] → End V .
By lemma 3.8(4), G has a subgroup A∗ ∼
= 2A4 . We write Q∗ for its
Q8 subgroup. We fix a Q16 -subgroup of G that contains Q∗ . This is
the only group isomorphic to Q16 we will consider, so we just write Q16
for it. Write Q for the other Q8 subgroup of Q16 . We will distinguish
two cases, according to whether there exists some A ∼
= 2A4 containing
Q. In each case we will prove α(R[G]) ∼
H,
which
implies that G is
=
∗
isomorphic to a subgroup of H . We assume this for the moment.

18

DANIEL ALLCOCK

A well-known property of H∗ is that every non-central cyclic subgroup has H∗ -normalizer isomorphic to the “continuous binary dihedral
group”, meaning the nonsplit extension (R/Z) · 2. It follows that the
G-normalizer of any non-central cyclic subgroup is cyclic or binary dihedral. The cyclic case is ruled out by corollary 2.6 and the perfectness
of G. So lemma 2.4 applies, proving G ∼
= 2A5 .
∼
It remains to prove α(R[G]) = H. First suppose that A exists. G is
generated by A and A∗ , because no maximal subgroup contains two
copies of 2A4 , whose Q8 subgroups generate a copy of Q16 . Now fix a
irreducible Q16 -submodule U of V . It is obviously Q- and Q∗ -invariant,
hence A- and A∗ -invariant by lemma 3.10. So it is G-invariant by
hA, A∗ i = G, and the G-irreducibility of V implies U = V . Lemmas
3.9 and 3.10 also give us the equalities
(3.2)

α(R[A]) = α(R[Q]) = α(R[Q16 ]) = α(R[Q∗ ]) = α(R[A∗ ])

and say that this subalgebra of End(U) is isomorphic to H. Since A
and A∗ generate G, α(R[G]) also equals this copy of H, finishing the
proof in the case that A exists.
Now suppose Q lies in no copy of 2A4 , and set N = NG (Q) and Φ =
Q∩Q∗ ∼
= Z/4. By (1) and (2) of lemma 3.8 we have N ∼ (O(N).2A4 )·2
with |O(N)| divisible by 3. By construction Q∗ normalizes Q, and by
Q∗ 6= Q we see that Q∗ contains a 4-element q ∗ which lies in N but
outside its index 2 subgroup O(N).2A4 . So q ∗ inverts O(N). Of course,
q ∗ also inverts Φ. And O(N) commutes with Q (hence Φ) by the known
structure of N. So H = hq ∗ , O(N), Φi = hQ∗ , O(N)i is binary dihedral.
The rest of the argument is similar to the previous case.
Namely, we have G = hH, A∗ i because no maximal subgroup M of
G contains a copy of Q8 which normalizes one copy of Z/3 in M and
is normalized by a different copy of Z/3 in M. Now we choose an
irreducible H-submodule U of V . It is trivially Q∗ -invariant. Then
lemma 3.10 shows that U is A∗ -invariant, hence G-invariant, hence all
of V . Lemmas 3.9–3.10 give the equalities
(3.3)

α(R[H]) = α(R[Q∗ ]) = α(R[A∗ ])

and say that this subalgebra of End(U) is isomorphic to H. By G =
hH, A∗ i, this subalgebra is also α(R[G]), finishing the proof.

Remark 3.12 (Frobenius complements). As mentioned in the introduction, our arguments adapt easily to classify the Frobenius complements,
which are the same groups. Supposing that G acts freely on a vector
space over a finite field Fq , where q is necessarily odd, we extend scalars
to suppose without loss that all elements of G are diagonalizable. Then
lemmas 3.9–3.11 and their proofs still apply with R replaced by Fq ,

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

19

H (the algebra) by M2 Fq , H (the module) by F2q , and H∗ by SL2 Fq .
(Although the proof of lemma 3.10 looks H-specific, one defines the
Hurwitz integers as the Z-span of the quaternions (3.1), and tensoring
with Fq gives M2 Fq .)
4. The imperfect case
In this section we will complete the proofs of theorems 1.1 and 1.2.
We suppose throughout that G is an imperfect finite group that acts
freely and isometrically on a sphere of some dimension, and that every
proper subgroup has one of the structures listed in the statement of theorem 1.1. We will prove that G also has one of these structures, in fact
a unique one in the sense of theorem 1.2. We will prove theorems 1.1
and 1.2 in three special cases (which don’t actually use imperfectness),
and then argue that these cases are enough.
Lemma 4.1. Suppose G/O(G) is a 2-group. Then G has type I or II
from theorem 1.1, for a unique-up-to-conjugation triple of subgroups
(A, B, T ).
Proof. We will construct A, B and T such that G ∼ A : (B × T )
as in theorem 1.1, along the way observing that the construction is
essentially unique. Obviously we must choose A and B such that
O(G) = A : B. Applying lemma 2.8 to O(G) proves the following.
The required coprimality of |A| and |B|, together with the requirement
that each nontrivial Sylow subgroup of B acts nontrivially on A, can be
satisfied in a unique way. That is, A is uniquely determined, and B is
determined up to conjugacy in O(G). Using the coprimality of |O(G)|
and |G/O(G)| ∼
= T , part (4) of lemma 2.8 shows that the decomposition O(G) = A : B extends to a decomposition G = A : (B × T ) where
T is determined uniquely up to conjugacy in NG (B).
This finishes the proof of uniqueness; it remains to check a few assertions of theorem 1.1. Lemma 2.3 says that T is cyclic or quaternionic.
Lemma 2.2 assures us that every prime-order element of B or T acts
trivially on every prime-order subgroup of A. An automorphism of the
cyclic group A, of order prime to |A| and acting trivially on every subgroup of prime order, must act trivially on all of A. So the prime-order
elements of B and T centralize A.

Lemma 4.2. Suppose G contains a normal subgroup 2A5 . Then G has
type V or VI from theorem 1.1, for a unique-up-to-conjugation tuple of
subgroups (A, B, 2A5 ) or (A, B, 2A5 , Φ).
Proof. We will show that there is a such a tuple, unique up to conjugation, whose 2A5 term is the given normal subgroup. The existence part

20

DANIEL ALLCOCK


of this assertion shows that G ∼ 2A5 ×(A : B) or G ∼ 2A5 ×(A : B) ·2
as in theorem 1.1. It follows that G has a unique normal subgroup isomorphic to 2A5 . So every tuple has this particular subgroup as its 2A5
term. The uniqueness of the tuple up to conjugacy follows.
It remains to prove the lemma for the given 2A5 subgroup. We define
I as the subgroup of G acting on 2A5 by inner automorphisms. Since
Out(2A5 ) = 2, I has index 1 or 2 in G. By its definition, I is generated
by 2A5 and C(2A5 ), whose intersection is the group Z generated by
G’s central involution. We claim that Z is the
 full Sylow 2-subgroup
of C(2A5 ). Otherwise, 2A5 /Z × C(2A5 )/Z ≤ G/Z would contain
an elementary abelian 2-group of rank 3. This is impossible because
the Sylow 2-subgroups of G/Z are dihedral. From corollary 2.6 and
the fact that C(2A5 ) has cyclic Sylow 2-subgroups, we get C(2A5 ) =
Z × O(C(2A5 )). It follows that I = 2A5 × O(I).
Obviously we must choose A and B such that A : B = O(I). As
in the previous proof, lemma 2.8 shows that there is an essentially
unique way to satisfy the conditions that |A| and |B| are coprime and
that every Sylow subgroup of B acts nontrivially on A. That is, A
is uniquely determined and B is determined up to conjugacy in O(I).
Also, |A| and |B| are coprime to 15 because G has no subgroup 3 × 3
or 5 × 5 (lemma 2.2). The prime-order elements of B act trivially on
A by the same argument as in the previous proof.
We have shown that I has type V, so if I = G then the proof is
complete. Otherwise, we know G ∼ 2A5 × (A : B) · 2 and we must
construct a suitable subgroup Φ ∼
= Z/4 of G. Because all complements
to A in A : B are conjugate, the Frattini argument shows that N(B)
surjects to G/A. So N(B) contains a Sylow 2-subgroup T ∼
= Q16 of
G. By Sylow’s theorem it is unique up to conjugacy in N(B). Obviously T ∩ 2A5 is isomorphic to Q8 . Now, T ∼
= Q16 contains exactly
two subgroups isomorphic to Z/4 that lie outside T ∩ 2A5 . So we must
take Φ to be one of them. They are conjugate under T ∩ 2A5 , so Φ is
uniquely defined up to a conjugation that preserves each of A, B and
2A5 . It remains only to check that Φ has the properties required for
G to be a type VI group. It acts on 2A5 by an outer automorphism
because it does not lie in I, by construction. To see that Φ commutes
with B, suppose to the contrary. Then some subgroup of B of prime
order p would lie in G′ . Then corollary 2.6 would show that the Sylow p-subgroup of B lies in G′ . So it acts trivially on A, which is a
contradiction.


SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

21

Lemma 4.3. Suppose G contains a normal subgroup Q ∼
= Q8 that lies
in G′ . Then G has type III or IV from theorem 1.1, for a unique-upto-conjugation tuple of subgroups (A, B, Q8 , Θ) or (A, B, Q8 , Θ, Φ).
Proof. Mimicking the previous proof, we will show that there is a
unique-up-to-conjugation tuple of such subgroups whose Q8 term is Q.
In particular, G ∼ (Q8 × A) : (B × Θ) or G ∼ (Q8 × A) : (B × Θ) · 2
as in theorem 1.1. This shows that G has a unique normal subgroup
isomorphic to Q8 , namely Q, which will complete the proof for the
same reason as before.
To show that there is a unique-up-conjugation tuple of subgroups
whose Q8 term is Q, consider the natural map G → Aut Q ∼
= S4 . We
claim the image G contains a 3-element. Otherwise, G ⊆ Aut Q ∼
=
S4 would lie in a Sylow 2-subgroup of Aut Q, which is dihedral of
′
order 8 with commutator subgroup of order 2. Therefore |G | would
have order ≤ 2. But this is a contradiction because Q lies in G′ and
Q∼
= S3
= 2×2. We have shown that the nontrivial 3-subgroup of Out Q ∼
lies in the image of G. (Now we can discard G.)
Let J be the preimage in G of this copy of Z/3. So G ∼ J.(1 or 2).
Obviously we must choose A, B and Θ so that J = (Q × A) : (B × Θ).
By construction, J has a nontrivial map to Z/3. So corollary 2.6 assures
us that J’s Sylow 3-subgroups map faithfully to J’s abelianization. In
particular, J = I.(cyclic 3-group) where |I| is prime to 3. Mimicking
the previous proof shows that I = Q × O(I). So we must choose A and
B so that A : B = O(I).
Continuing to follow the previous proof shows that there is an essentially unique way to satisfy the conditions that |A| and |B| are coprime
and that every Sylow subgroup of B acts nontrivially on A. That is, A
is uniquely determined and B is determined up to conjugacy in O(I).
The prime-order elements of B act trivially on A for the same reason
as before. We have shown
I

z

}|
{
G ∼ Q × (A : B) .(nontrivial cyclic 3-group) .(1 or 2)
|
{z
}
J

Having worked our way to the “middle” of G, we now work outwards
and construct Θ and (if required) Φ. Using the conjugacy of complements to A in A : B, the Frattini argument shows that NJ (B) maps
onto J/(A : B). So NJ (B) contains a Sylow 3-subgroup of J, indeed a
unique one up to conjugacy in NJ (B). So there is an essentially unique
possibility for Θ. As observed above, Θ acts nontrivially on Q. Its
3-elements act trivially on A for the same reason that B’s prime-order

22

DANIEL ALLCOCK

elements do. Finally, Θ commutes with B. Otherwise, some Sylow
subgroup of B would lie in G′ , hence act trivially on A, contrary to B’s
construction.
We have shown that J has type III, so if J = G then we are done.
Otherwise, mimicking the previous proof shows that there exists a
group Φ ∼
= Z/4 in N(B × Θ) that does not lie in J, and that such
a group is unique up to conjugacy in N(B × Θ). Also as before, Φ
commutes with B. By Φ 6≤ J, Φ’s 4-elements act on Q by outer automorphisms. Since the images of Φ and Θ in Out Q ∼
= S3 do not
commute, Φ cannot commute with Θ. Therefore Φ’s 4-elements must
invert Θ. So G has type IV and the proof is complete.

To finish the proofs of theorems 1.1 and 1.2 we will show that G
satisfies the hypotheses of one of lemmas 4.1–4.3. By imperfectness, G
has a normal subgroup M of prime index p. By induction, M has one
of the structures I–VI. We will examine the various cases and see that
one of the lemmas applies.
If M has type V or VI then it contains a unique subgroup 2A5 , which
is therefore normal in G, so lemma 4.2 applies. If M has type III
or IV then it contains a unique normal subgroup Q8 , which is therefore
normal in G. Also, this Q8 lies in M ′ , hence G′ , so lemma 4.3 applies.

Finally, suppose M has type I or II, so M ∼ A : B × (2-group T ) .
If p = 2 then O(G) = O(M) = A : B and G/O(G) is a 2-group, so
lemma 4.1 applies.
So suppose p > 2, and observe that G/O(M) has structure T.p.
Choose a subgroup P of order p in G/O(M). If it acts trivially on T
then we have G/O(M) ∼
= T ×p, so G/O(G) ∼
= T and lemma 4.1 applies.
So suppose P acts nontrivially on T . The automorphism group of any
cyclic or quaternionic 2-group is a 2-group, except for Aut Q8 ∼
= S4 .
Since P acts nontrivially, we must have T ∼
= Q8 and p = 3. The
nontriviality of P ’s action also implies T < G′ . From this and the fact
that Aut A is abelian, it follows that T acts trivially on A. So T is
normal in M. As M’s unique Sylow 2-subgroup, it is normal in G. So
lemma 4.3 applies. This completes the proofs of theorems 1.1 and 1.2.
5. Irredundant enumeration
The uniqueness expressed in theorem 1.2 makes the isomorphism classification of groups in theorem 1.1 fairly simple. Namely, one specifies
such a group G up to isomorphism by choosing its type I–VI, a suitable
number a for the order of A, a suitable subgroup G of the unit group
(Z/a)∗ of the ring Z/a, and a suitable number g for the order of G.

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

23

In a special case one must also specify a suitable subgroup G0 of G.
Before developing this, we illustrate some redundancy in Wolf’s list.
Example 5.1 (Duplication). Wolf’s presentations of type II in [7, theorem 6.1.11] have generators A, B, R and relations
Am = B n = 1
R2 = B n/2

BAB −1 = Ar

RAR−1 = Al

RBR−1 = B k

where (m, n, r, k, l) are numerical parameters satisfying nine conditions.
It turns out that the six choices (3, 20, −1, −1, ±1), (5, 12, −1, −1, ±1)
and (15, 4, −1, −1, 4 or 11) give isomorphic groups, namely (3×5) : Q8 .
Here one class of 4-elements in Q8 inverts just the Z/3 factor, another
class inverts just the Z/5 factor, and the third class inverts both. Wolf
decomposes this group by choosing an index 2 subgroup (call it H)
with cyclic Sylow 2-subgroup, taking A to generate H ′ , and taking B
to generate a complement to H ′ in H (which always exists). Then he
takes R to be a 4-element outside of H, that normalizes hBi. There
are three ways to choose H, corresponding to the three Z/4’s in Q8 .
After H is chosen, there are unique choices for hAi and hBi, but two
choices for hRi. These choices lead to the six different presentations.
Our form of this group is A : (B × Q8 ) = 15 : (1 × Q8 ) = 15 : Q8 . (Our
A and B are subgroups, while Wolf’s A and B are elements.)
A minor additional source of redundancy is that replacing Wolf’s
B by a different generator of hBi can change the parameter r in the
presentation above.
Given a group G from theorem 1.1, we record the following invariants. First we record its type I–VI, which is well-defined by the easy
part of theorem 1.2, proven in section 1. Second we record g := |G|,
a := |A| and G, where bars will indicate images in Aut A. Finally,
and only if G has type II and its order is divisible by 16, we record
G0 , where G0 is the unique index 2 subgroup of G with cyclic Sylow
2-subgroups.
Aut A is canonically isomorphic to the group of units (Z/a)∗ of the
ring Z/a, with u ∈ (Z/a)∗ corresponding to the uth power map. Therefore we will regard G and G0 as subgroups of (Z/a)∗ . This is useful
when comparing two groups G, G∗ :
Theorem 5.2 (Isomorphism recognition). Two finite groups G and
G∗ , that act freely and isometrically on spheres of some dimensions,
are isomorphic if and only if they have the same type, and g = g ∗ ,
∗
∗
a = a∗ , G = G , and (if they are defined) G0 = G0 .

24

DANIEL ALLCOCK

Proof. First suppose G ∼
= G∗ . We have already mentioned that they
have the same type, and they obviously have the same order. By the
uniqueness of A and A∗ (theorem 1.2), any isomorphism G → G∗
identifies A with A∗ . In particular, a = a∗ , and the action of G on A
∗
corresponds to that of G∗ on A∗ . So we must have G = G , and (when
∗
defined) G0 = G0 .
Now suppose G and G∗ have the same invariants; we must construct
an isomorphism between them. Case analysis seems unavoidable, but
the ideas are uniform and only the details vary.
Type I. Since A and A∗ are cyclic of the same order, we may choose an
isomorphism A ∼
= A∗ . By order considerations we have |B| = |B ∗ | and
|T | = |T ∗ |. Again by order considerations, the identification of G with
∗
G under the canonical isomorphism Aut A = Aut A∗ identifies B with
∗
∗
B and T with T . Because B and B ∗ are cyclic of the same order,
∗
we may lift the identification B ∼
= B to an isomorphism B ∼
= B ∗,
∗
∗
and similarly for T and T . Together with A ∼
= A , these give an
∗
∼
isomorphism G = G .
∗
Type II when 16 divides |G| = |G∗ |. Because G0 is identified with G0 ,
the previous case gives an isomorphism G0 ∼
= G∗0 that identifies A with
∗
∗
A , B with B and the cyclic 2-group T0 := T ∩ G0 with T0∗ := T ∗ ∩ G∗0 .
We will extend this to an isomorphism G ∼
= G∗ . Choose an element φ
∗
∗
of T − T0 . By the identification of T with T and T 0 with T 0 , there
exists an element φ∗ of T ∗ − T0∗ whose action on A∗ corresponds to
φ’s action on A. As elements of T − T0 and T ∗ − T0∗ , φ and φ∗ have
order 4. They commute with B and B ∗ respectively. Their squares are
the unique involutions in T0 and T0∗ , which we have already identified
with each other. So identifying φ with φ∗ extends our isomorphism
∗
∗
G0 ∼
=G .
= G0 to G ∼
Type II when 16 does not divide |G| = |G∗ |. The argument for
type I identifies A with A∗ and B with B ∗ . Both G and G∗ have
Sylow 2-subgroups isomorphic to Q8 . T is the Sylow 2-subgroup of
G, and is elementary abelian of rank ≤ 2 because Q8 /Q′8 ∼
= 2 × 2.
∗
∗
The identification of G with G identifies T with T . Because Aut Q8
∗
acts as S3 on Q8 /Q′8 , it is possible to lift the identification T ∼
= T to
an isomorphism T ∼
= B ∗,
= A∗ , B ∼
= T ∗ . Now our identifications A ∼
T ∼
= T ∗ fit together to give an isomorphism G ∼
= G∗ .
∗
Type III. Choose an isomorphism A ∼
= A . By |G| = |G∗ | we get
∗
|B| = |B ∗ | and |Θ| = |Θ∗ |. The identification of G ≤ Aut A with G ≤
∗
∗
Aut A∗ identifies Θ with Θ and B with B . These identifications can
be lifted to isomorphisms Θ ∼
= Θ∗ and B ∼
= B ∗ by the same reasoning
as before. Because all 3-elements in Aut Q8 ∼
= S4 are conjugate, it

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

25

is possible to choose an isomorphism Q8 ∼
= Q∗8 compatible with our
∗
isomorphism Θ ∼
= Θ and the homomorphisms Θ → Aut Q8 and Θ∗ →
Aut Q∗8 . Now our identifications A ∼
= Θ∗ and
= B∗, Θ ∼
= A∗ , B ∼
∗
∗
Q8 ∼
=G .
= Q8 fit together to give an isomorphism G ∼
∗
∗
Type IV. Identify A, B and Θ with A , B and Θ∗ as in the previous
case. Choose generators φ and φ∗ for Φ and Φ∗ . Their actions on A and
∗
A∗ correspond, because they act by the unique involutions in G and G
if these exist, and trivially otherwise. The image of φ in Aut Q8 ∼
= S4
normalizes the image of Θ, so together they generate a copy of S3 , and
similarly for their starred versions. Any isomorphism from one S3 in
Aut Q8 to another is induced by some conjugation in Aut Q8 . (One
checks this using Aut Q8 ∼
= S4 .) Therefore it is possible to identify Q8
∗
with Q8 , such that the actions of Θ and Θ∗ on them correspond, and
the actions of φ and φ∗ also correspond. Using this, and identifying φ
with φ∗ , gives an isomorphism G ∼
= G∗ .
Type V. Identify A and B with A∗ and B ∗ as in previous cases, and
2A5 with 2A∗5 however one likes.
Type VI. Identify A and B with A∗ and B ∗ as before, and choose
generators φ and φ∗ for Φ and Φ∗ . As in the type IV case, their actions
on A and A∗ correspond. Next, φ and φ∗ act on 2A5 and 2A∗5 by involutions which are not inner automorphisms. All such automorphisms
of 2A5 are conjugate in Aut(2A5 ). (They correspond to the involutions
in S5 − A5 .) So we may identify 2A5 with 2A∗5 in such a way that the
actions of φ and φ∗ on them correspond. Using this, and identifying φ

with φ∗ , gives an isomorphism G ∼
= G∗ .
We can now parameterize the isomorphism classes of finite groups G
that admit free actions on spheres. First one specifies a type I–VI. Then
one specifies a positive integer a, a subgroup G of (Z/a)∗ , and possibly
a subgroup G0 of G, all satisfying some constraints. Then one chooses
one or more auxiliary parameters, constrained in terms of properties
of G. Together with a, these specify g, hence the isomorphism type
of G. The following theorem is proven by combining theorem 5.2 with
an analysis of what possibilities can actually arise. We will write the
parameters a, G and g in the order one chooses them, rather than in
the order used in theorem 5.2.
The constraints on the choices of parameters are difficult to express
uniformly. But the constraint on one auxiliary parameter, called b, is
uniform. For each type we obtain a positive integer b from the structure
of G, and b must be the product of b and nontrivial powers of all the
primes dividing b. We will express this by saying “b is as above.”

26

DANIEL ALLCOCK

Theorem 5.3 (Irredundant enumeration). Suppose G is a finite group
admitting a free and isometric action on a sphere. Then there is exactly one tuple (I—VI, a, G, g) or (II, a, G, G0 , g) listed below, whose
corresponding group (defined at the end) is isomorphic to G.

(Type I, a, G, g = abt) where
(1) a is odd.
(2) G is a cyclic subgroup of (Z/a)∗ of order prime to a. Define b
and t as the odd and 2-power parts of |G|.
(3) b is as above and t is a power of 2, larger than t if t 6= 1.
(Type II, a, G, g = abt) or (Type II, a, G, G0 , g = abt) where
(1) a is odd.
(2) G is a subgroup of (Z/a)∗ which is the direct product of a cyclic
group of order prime to 2a and an elementary abelian 2-group
of rank ≤ 2. Define b and t as the orders of these factors.
(3) G0 , if specified, is a subgroup of G of index 2 (if t = 4) or
index ≤ 2 (otherwise).
(4) b is as above; and t = 8, unless G0 was specified, in which case t
is a power of 2, larger than 8.
(Type III, a, G, g = 8abθ) where
(1) a is prime to 6.
(2) G is a subgroup of (Z/a)∗ which is the direct product of a cyclic
3-group and a cyclic group of order prime to 6a. Define θ̄ and b
as the orders of these factors.
(3) b is as above and θ is a power of 3, larger than θ̄.
(Type IV, a, G, g = 16abθ) where
(1) a is prime to 6.
(2) G is a subgroup of (Z/a)∗ which is the direct product of a cyclic
group of order prime to 6a and a group of order 1 or 2. Define b
as the order of the first factor.
(3) b is as above and θ is a nontrivial power of 3.
(Type V, a, G, g = 120ab) where
(1) a is prime to 30.
(2) G is a cyclic subgroup of (Z/a)∗ of order prime to 30a. Define b
as its order.
(3) b is as above.
(Type VI, a, G, g = 240ab) where
(1) a is prime to 30.

SPHERICAL SPACE FORMS REVISITED

27

(2) G is a subgroup of (Z/a)∗ which is the direct product of a cyclic
group of order prime to 30a and a group of order 1 or 2. Define b
as the order of the first factor.
(3) b is as above.
Here are instructions for building G. In a sense this is a constructive
version of the proof of theorem 5.2. For all types, start by taking cyclic
groups A, B with orders a, b. Up to isomorphism of the domain, B
has a unique surjection to the subgroup of G ⊆ Aut A of order b. Form
the corresponding semidirect product A : B. Now we consider the six
cases.
The easiest is type V—just set G = 2A5 × (A : B).
For type I, we take a cyclic group T of order t. Just as for B, there is
an essentially unique surjection from T to the subgroup of G of order t.
Then G is the semidirect product A : (B × T ).
For type III one takes a cyclic group Θ of order θ. Just as for B,
there is an essentially unique surjection from Θ to the subgroup of G of
order θ̄. We also take Θ to act nontrivially on Q8 . (Up to conjugacy in
Aut Q8 there is a unique nontrivial action.) Then G is the semidirect
product (Q8 × A) : (B × Θ). B acts trivially on Q8 ; this is forced since
|B| is prime to 6.
A type IV or VI group is got from a type III or V group by adjoining a
suitable 4-element φ. In both cases, φ squares to the central involution,
centralizes B, and acts on A by the nontrivial involution in G (if one
exists) or trivially (otherwise). For type VI, φ acts on 2A5 by an outer
automorphism of order 2, which is unique up to Aut 2A5 . For type IV,
φ inverts Θ and acts on Q8 by an involution that inverts the action
of Θ. Such an automorphism is unique up to an automorphism of Q8
that respects the Θ-action.
One can describe type II groups in terms of type I in a similar way,
but it is easier to build them directly. Take T to be a quaternion group
of order t. First suppose t = 8. Then we did not specify G0 . Up to
automorphism of the domain there is a unique surjection from T to
the subgroup T of G of order t. We take G = A : (B × T ). On the
other hand, suppose t > 8, in which case we did specify G0 . We write
T0 for the index 2 cyclic subgroup of T . Up to automorphism of the
domain, there is a unique surjection from T to T which carries T0 onto
the 2-part of G0 (which has order 1 or 2). And again G = A : (B × T ).
References
[1] Conway, J. H., et. al., Atlas of Finite Groups., Oxford University Press, Eynsham, 1985.

28

DANIEL ALLCOCK

[2] Gorenstein, D., Finite groups. Harper & Row, New York-London, 1968.
[3] Isaacs, I. Martin, Finite group theory. Graduate Studies in Mathematics 92.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008
[4] Meierfrankenfeld, U., Perfect Frobenius complements, Arch. Math. (Basel) 79
(2002) 19–26.
[5] Passman, D., Permutation Groups, W. A. Benjamin, New York, 1968.
[6] Wall, C. T. C., On the structure of finite groups with periodic cohomology,
in Lie groups: structure, actions, and representations, 381–413, Progr. Math.
306, Birkhuser/Springer, New York, 2013.
[7] Wolf, J., Spaces of Constant Curvature, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.
[8] Zassenhaus, H., Über endliche Fastkörper, Abh. Math. Sem. Hamburg 11
(1936) 187–220.
[9] Zassenhaus, H., On Frobenius groups. I, Results Math. 8 (1985) 132–145.
Department of Mathematics,, University of Texas, Austin
E-mail address: allcock@math.utexas.edu
URL: http://www.math.utexas.edu/~allcock

