Talk:Perfect group

the realm of group theory ? 'tf is that ?! just say "in group theory"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.26.49.101 (talk) 01:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "In group theory" is definitely the prominent phrase in most Wikipedia mathematics article. However, every author has a different style, and perhaps those involved in writing the opening of this article felt that "the realm of group theory" fits better in the sentence. That said, it is irrelevant to the article as a whole; if you wish to change it, you are most welcome to do so and I do not think anyone will object. PS  T  02:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Unnecessarily complicated wording?
Perhaps I am just being silly, but I feel that the phrase

"More generally, any non-abelian simple group is perfect since the commutator subgroup is a normal subgroup with abelian quotient."

is perhaps unnecessarily complicated as it requires the reader to piece together a few implications. More precisely, the reader must realize that since the group is simple, it has no non-trivial normal subgroups implying that the commutator is either $$ G $$ or $$ \{e\}$$. Now if $$[G,G] = \{e\}$$ then $$G/[G,G]=G$$ is abelian, but this is not possible, hence $$ [G,G] = G $$ and the group is perfect. This could be written much simpler by just saying that a non-abelian simple group only has quotients $$ G $$ or $$ \{e\}$$, one of which is trivial and the other of which is abelian. However, if someone objects I won't bother to change it. Kreizhn (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)