Difference between revisions of "Group"
m |
m |
||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
One need not write "(because {{M|G}} is Abelian)" after steps in proofs, additive implies Abelian so for example if I am writing: | One need not write "(because {{M|G}} is Abelian)" after steps in proofs, additive implies Abelian so for example if I am writing: | ||
| − | + | * <math>...\implies A+B=C+A</math> but <math>C+A=A+C</math> so we may use the cancellation laws.... | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
it is clear that I am using the property of commutativity | it is clear that I am using the property of commutativity | ||
| − | + | * <math>...\implies ab=ca</math> but <math>ca=ac</math> so we may use the cancellation laws.... | |
| − | + | ||
This looks like <math>ca=ac</math> may have come from a lemma or previous part, so writing: | This looks like <math>ca=ac</math> may have come from a lemma or previous part, so writing: | ||
| − | + | * <math>...\implies ab=ca</math> but <math>ca=ac</math> (as {{M|G}} is Abelian) so we may use the cancellation laws.... | |
| − | + | ||
Perfect | Perfect | ||
==Important theorems== | ==Important theorems== | ||
Revision as of 14:28, 11 March 2015
Contents
Definition
A group is a set [ilmath]G[/ilmath] and an operation [math]*:G\times G\rightarrow G[/math], denoted [math](G,*:G\times G\rightarrow G)[/math] but mathematicians are lazy so we just write [math](G,*)[/math]
Such that the following axioms hold:
Axioms
| Formal | Words |
|---|---|
| [math]\forall a,b,c\in G:[(a*b)*c=a*(b*c)][/math] | [ilmath]*[/ilmath] is associative, because of this we may write [math]a*b*c[/math] unambiguously. |
| [math]\exists e\in G\forall g\in G[e*g=g*e=g][/math] | [ilmath]*[/ilmath] has an identity element |
| [math]\forall g\in G\exists x\in G[xg=gx=e][/math] | All elements of [ilmath]G[/ilmath] have an inverse element under [ilmath]*[/ilmath], that is |
| For an "Abelian" or "commutative" group | |
| [math]\forall g\in G\forall h\in G[gh=hg][/math] | Order of the operation does not matter - it is commutative |
Notations
Usually with groups we use "multiplicative notation", if the group is Abelian we use additive. This is (probably) motivated from linear algebra. Addition of matrices is commutative, just like with numbers however multiplication is not (always) commutative, so we do not.
Additive
Seriously, additive notation unofficially [math]\implies[/math] the group is Abelian - we use [ilmath]0[/ilmath] for the identity and [ilmath](-x)[/ilmath] for the inverse, [ilmath]y-x[/ilmath] is simply a short hand for [ilmath]y+(-x)[/ilmath]
Doing things multiple times is denoted as one would expect, [math]nx=x+x+...+x[/math] Always be explicit that n is not in the group
TODO: Relate to group action
To do this write something like "Let [ilmath]G[/ilmath] be an Abelian group with the operation [ilmath]+:G\times G\rightarrow G[/ilmath] given by (definition of addition)"
If the operation is obvious then "Let [ilmath]G[/ilmath] be the set of (whatever) and let [ilmath](G,+)[/ilmath] be a group"
Multiplicative
Multiplicative groups may be Abelian, but it really ought to be explicit We use [ilmath]1[/ilmath] to denote the identity element and [ilmath]x^{-1} [/ilmath] to denote the inverse. Note that [math]x^n=xxx...x[/math] x multipled n times. Make it clear that n is not a member of the group!
TODO: Link with group action
Convention notes
One need not write "(because [ilmath]G[/ilmath] is Abelian)" after steps in proofs, additive implies Abelian so for example if I am writing:
- [math]...\implies A+B=C+A[/math] but [math]C+A=A+C[/math] so we may use the cancellation laws....
it is clear that I am using the property of commutativity
- [math]...\implies ab=ca[/math] but [math]ca=ac[/math] so we may use the cancellation laws....
This looks like [math]ca=ac[/math] may have come from a lemma or previous part, so writing:
- [math]...\implies ab=ca[/math] but [math]ca=ac[/math] (as [ilmath]G[/ilmath] is Abelian) so we may use the cancellation laws....
Perfect
Important theorems
Identity is unique
Proof that the identity is unique. (Method: assume [ilmath]e[/ilmath] and [ilmath]e'[/ilmath] with [math]e\ne e'[/math] are both identities, reach a contradiction)
Assume there are two identity elements, [ilmath]e[/ilmath] and [ilmath]e'[/ilmath] with [math]e\ne e'[/math].
That is both:
- [math]\forall g\in G[e*g=g*e=g][/math]
- [math]\forall g\in G[e'*g=g*e'=g][/math]
But then [math]ee'=e[/math] and also [math]ee'=e'[/math] thus we see [math]e'=e[/math] contradicting that they were different.
Now we know the identity is unique, so we can give it a symbol:
| Group | Identity element |
|---|---|
| [ilmath](G,+)[/ilmath] - additive notation [ilmath]a+b[/ilmath] | We denote the identity [ilmath]0[/ilmath], so [math]a+0=0+a=a[/math] |
| [ilmath](G,*)[/ilmath] - multiplicative notation [ilmath]ab[/ilmath] | We denote the identity [ilmath]1[/ilmath], so [math]1a=a*1=a[/math] |
| [ilmath]\text{GL}(n,F)[/ilmath] - the General linear group (All [ilmath]n\times n[/ilmath] matrices of non-zero determinant) |
We denote the identity by [ilmath]Id,I,I_n[/ilmath] or sometimes [ilmath]Id_n[/ilmath] that is [math]AI=IA=A[/math] |
Inverse is unique
Proof that the inverse is unique. (Suppose that [math]x[/math] and [ilmath]x'[/ilmath] are both inverses with [ilmath]x\ne x'[/ilmath] and reach a contradiction
Suppose that for any [ilmath]g\in G[/ilmath] we have [ilmath]x[/ilmath] and [ilmath]x'[/ilmath] being inverses (recall the inverse statement: [math]\forall g\in G\exists x\in G[xg=gx=e][/math])
Then we have both:
- [math]gx=xg=e[/math]
- [math]gx'=x'g=e[/math]
Take the product [math]xgx'[/math]
By associativity
- [math]xgx'=(xg)x' = ex' = x'[/math]
- [math]xgx'=x(gx') = xe = x[/math]
Thus [math]x=x'[/math] contradicting that they were distinct.
We may now denote the inverse of an element uniquely.
Here [ilmath]x[/ilmath] is some arbitrary member of [ilmath]G[/ilmath]
| Group | Inverse element |
|---|---|
| [ilmath](G,+)[/ilmath] - additive notation [ilmath]a+b[/ilmath] | We denote the inverse by [ilmath]-x[/ilmath], so [math]x+(-x)=(-x)+x=0[/math] |
| Note that [math]a+(-x)[/math] is often written as [math]a-x[/math] - this is a shorthand, no "subtraction" is defined | |
| [ilmath](G,*)[/ilmath] - multiplicative notation [ilmath]ab[/ilmath] | We denote the inverse of [ilmath]x[/ilmath] by [ilmath]x^{-1} [/ilmath], so [math]x^{-1}x=xx^{-1}=1[/math] |
| [ilmath]\text{GL}(n,F)[/ilmath] - the General linear group (All [ilmath]n\times n[/ilmath] matrices of non-zero determinant) |
We denote the inverse of [ilmath]X\in GL(n,F)[/ilmath] by [ilmath]X^{-1} [/ilmath] |
Cancellation laws
These are extremely important.
- [math]ab=ac\implies b=c[/math]
- [math]ba=ca\implies b=c[/math]
Proof
TODO:
