Need of ‘$p$ is prime’ in proof of Cauchy’s theorem by McKay

abstract-algebragroup-theoryprime numbersproof-explanation

This is outline of James McKay's proof of Cauchy's theorem by Dummit Foote Abstract Algebra:

enter image description here

I need explanation for part (e), where they say: every equivalence class has order $1$ or $p$, and here they claim that $p$ is prime. But, I think that even if $p$ was not prime, every equivalence class would have order $1$ or $p$. For example, in $\Bbb Z/4\Bbb Z$, when we form similar $\mathcal S$, then tuples like $(2,2,2,2)$ have order $1$ but tuples like $(1,2,3,2)$ have order $4$. So, where do we use the fact that $p$ is prime?

Best Answer

For $p=4$ you have tuples such as $(1,2,1,2)$ which have order $2$.

The point is that the cyclic group of order $p$ acts on the set of $p$-tuples by cyclic permutations. When $p$ is prime, the size of each orbit of this action is a factor of $p$, so is $1$ or $p$. When $p$ is not prime, then one gets orbits whose size is a proper factor of $p$, and the argument collapses.