In "A Book of Abstract Algebra" by Pinter, chapter 16.G is the following exercise:
If H is a subgroup of a group G, let X designate the set of all the left cosets of H in G. For each element $a \in G$, define $ρ_a:X \to X$ as follows: $$ρ_a(xH)=(ax)H$$ 1 Prove that each $ρ_a$ is a permutation of X
2 Prove that $h:G \to S_X$ defined by $h(a)=ρ_a$ is a homomorphism
3 Prove that the set $\{a \in H:xax^{-1} \in H$ for every $x \in G\}$, that is, the set of all elements of H whose conjugates are all in H, is the kernel of h
4 Prove that if H contains no normal subgroup of G except {e} (trivial group), then G is isomorphic to a subgroup of $S_X$
I finished proving these, but I don't understand what the theorem is really saying, and why it's an interesting result and what "sharper" means, since the original Cayley's theorem already said that every group G is isomorphic to a group of permutations, and here I proved that G is isomorphic to "another" group of permutations, but now making extra assumptions.
The wikipedia page on Cayley's theorem has the same result but there instead of making the assuption that H has no normal subgroups except for the trivial group, it just says that the case where H itself is the trivial group produces the original Cayley's theorem, but I still can't "see" it, is the fact that the quotient group of G by the set in point 3 (or the normal core of H in G) is isomorphic to a group of permutations important?.
I understand that Cayley's theorem is one "case" of this new theorem but I'd like to deeply understand what this new one means and how to intuitively think about it.