Mathematicians often strive for a complete classification (or list) of a mathematical notion. In the context of finite groups, this aim leads to difficult mathematics. According to Lagrange's theorem, finite groups of order p, a prime number, are necessarily cyclic (abelian) groups Zp. Groups of order p2 can also be shown to be abelian, a statement which does not generalize to order p3, as the non-abelian group D4 of order 8 = 23 above shows. Computer algebra systems can be used to list small groups, but there is no classification of all finite groups.q[›] An intermediate step is the classification of finite simple groups.r[›] A nontrivial group is called simple if its only normal subgroups are the trivial group and the group itself.s[›] The Jordan–Hölder theorem exhibits finite simple groups as the building blocks for all finite groups. Listing all finite simple groups was a major achievement in contemporary group theory. 1998 Fields Medal winner Richard Borcherds succeeded in proving the monstrous moonshine conjectures, a surprising and deep relation between the largest finite simple sporadic group—the "monster group"—and certain modular functions, a piece of classical complex analysis, and string theory, a theory supposed to unify the description of many physical phenomena.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): What can be used to classify small groups even though there is no classification of all finite groups?
Computer algebra systems