How Can I Prove |ab| = |ba| in a Group?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jupiter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that in a group \( G \), the order of the product of two elements \( ab \) is equal to the order of the product \( ba \). Participants explore various approaches, including induction, specific cases, and the use of group properties such as associativity, identity, and inverses.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about how to start the proof and suggests that associativity, identity, and inverses might be important tools.
  • Another participant clarifies that \( |ab| \) refers to the order of the element \( ab \), defined as the least positive integer \( n \) such that \( (ab)^n = e \).
  • A suggestion is made to start with the equation \( (ab)^n = e \) and manipulate it to derive \( (ba)^n \).
  • One participant proposes proving \( a(ba)^n a^{-1} = (ab)^n \) by induction, and discusses implications for the orders of \( ab \) and \( ba \).
  • Another participant recommends examining simple cases, such as when \( |ab| = 1 \) or \( |ab| = 2 \), and suggests that the case where \( |ab| = \infty \) may require a proof by contradiction.
  • A participant questions the validity of a previous statement and points out a potential error in the proof by induction presented by another participant.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants have not reached a consensus on the proof or the validity of certain approaches. Multiple competing views and methods are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about notation and definitions are not universally recognized among participants, leading to potential confusion. The discussion includes various mathematical steps that are not fully resolved.

Jupiter
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
I have to show that in a group G |ab|=|ba| for all a,b in G.

I don't have a clue how to proceed. I assume |ab|=n. I feel that using associativity, identity and inverse should be important. But I don't see how these tools will get me to |ba|=n.
I've considered proof by contradiciton, but that doesn't seem to be useful here.

Can someone please give me a hint?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, I guess my first question is what you mean by |x|.
 
Sorry, I figured |ab| would be understood to mean the order of ab; that is, the least positive number n such that (ab)^n=e. I'm new in the study of algebra, so I do not know what notation is most widely recognized, or in what contexts.
 
I thought that might be what you mean, but I wasn't sure; I've only seen that notation used for the order of a group, not the individual elements.


Anyways, try this:

Start with the equation [itex](ab)^n=e[/itex]. What can you do to this equation to turn the left hand side into [itex](ba)^n[/itex]?

Oh, and don't forget this fun bit of number theory: [itex]a | b \wedge b | a \implies a = b[/itex] (if both a and b are positive integers)
 
here's one way i think it could work:
prove [tex]a\left( ba\right) ^{n}a^{-1}=\left( ab\right) ^{n}[/tex] (by induction, eg).

then [tex]\left( ba\right) ^{\left| ba\right| }=e\rightarrow \left( ab\right) ^{\left| ba\right| }=a\left( ba\right) ^{\left| ba\right| }a^{-1}=e\rightarrow \left| ab\right| |\left| ba\right|[/tex].

then prove [tex]\left( ba\right) ^{n}=a^{-1}\left( ab\right) ^{n}a[/tex] to get that [tex]\left| ba\right| |\left| ab\right|[/tex].
 
Phoenixtoth: Your first line of LaTeX is not generally true. Although for your argument you could go with [tex]a(e)a^{-1}=e[/tex] which is obviously true.
Jupiter:
Perhaps you should look at some simple cases:

If [tex]|ab|=1[/tex] you should have little trouble.

Once you've figured that one out, try [tex]|ab|=2[/tex]. You should be able to work it out from there.

I think you'll have to handle the [tex]|ab|=\infty[/tex] case separately, and that it will involve some type of proof by contradiction.
 
nateTG,
if it's not true, can you find a counter example?

here's my proof by induction. can you spot an error?
[tex]a\left( ba\right) ^{n}a^{-1}=\left( ab\right) ^{n}[/tex] is clear for n=0 if empty products are defined to equal e.

assume now that [tex]a\left( ba\right) ^{n}a^{-1}=\left( ab\right) ^{n}[/tex] for n>0. multiply the left hand side by [tex]a^{-1}[/tex] and the right hand side by [tex]a[/tex] to get this:
[tex]\left( ba\right) ^{n}=a^{-1}\left( ab\right) ^{n}a[/tex]. then
[tex]a\left( ba\right) ^{n+1}a^{-1}=a\left( ba\right) ^{n}\left( ba\right) a^{-1}=a\left( a^{-1}\left( ab\right) ^{n}a\right) \left( ba\right) a^{-1}=\left( ab\right) ^{n+1}[/tex].
 
Sorry. Dyslexia strikes again. I thought you had:
[tex]a(ab)^na^{-1}=(ab)^n[/tex] which is not generally true.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K