Intersection of subgroups is a subgroup

In summary, the proof for showing that H intersect K is a subgroup of G is based on the theorem that states if G is a group and H is a nonempty subset of G, then H is a subgroup of G if and only if for any a,b in H, ab^-1 is also in H. Using this theorem, we can show that H intersect K is a subgroup of G by showing that for any a,b in H intersect K, ab^-1 is also in H intersect K. This is done by using the fact that H and K are subgroups of G, and therefore contain the identity element, inverse elements, and are closed under the group operation.
  • #1
TheoryNoob
4
0

Homework Statement



Suppose H and K are subgroups of G. Prove H intersect K is a subgroup of G.

Homework Equations



Suppose G is a group and H is a nonempty subset of G. Then H is a subgroup of G iff a,b ∈ H implies ab^-1 ∈ H.

The Attempt at a Solution



Suppose a and b elements of H intersect K. Since H is a subgroup of G and K is a subgroup G, then ab^-1 is an element of H and ab^-1 is an element of K, this implies ab^-1 is an element of H intersect K, this implies H intersect K is a subgroup of G.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You're off to a decent start, but why are you considering ##ab^{-1}## instead of ##ab##? What is your definition of "subgroup"? Shouldn't you say something about the identity element and something more specific about inverse elements?

You might want to use shorter sentences, or at least commas. I would start something like this: Let ##a,b\in H\cap K## be arbitrary. Since H is a subgroup and ##a,b\in H##, we have ##ab\in H##. Since K is a subgroup...
 
  • #3
Fredrik said:
You're off to a decent start, but why are you considering ##ab^{-1}## instead of ##ab##? What is your definition of "subgroup"? Shouldn't you say something about the identity element and something more specific about inverse elements?

If for each ##a,b\in G## you can show that ##ab^{-1}\in G##, then you have
  • ##1_G = aa^{-1} \in G##, i.e. ##G## has an identity element.
  • ##b^{-1} = 1_Gb^{-1} \in G##, i.e. ##G## contains an inverse for each element.
  • ##ab = a(b^{-1})^{-1} \in G##, i.e. ##G## is closed under the group operation.
 
  • #4
I'm sorry I should have included this in part 2 of the outline.

I am basing this proof of the following theorem:

Suppose G is a group and H is a nonempty subset of G. Then H is a subgroup of G iff a,b ∈ H implies ab^-1 ∈ H.

We have previously proved this theorem which is why I didn't mention an identity or inverse.

Sorry about the long sentence in the proof, I have it written here on paper with symbols and tried to directly type it into words.

Based off this theorem is my proof ok?
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Michael Redei said:
If for each ##a,b\in G## you can show that ##ab^{-1}\in G##, then you have
  • ##1_G = aa^{-1} \in G##, i.e. ##G## has an identity element.
  • ##b^{-1} = 1_Gb^{-1} \in G##, i.e. ##G## contains an inverse for each element.
  • ##ab = a(b^{-1})^{-1} \in G##, i.e. ##G## is closed under the group operation.
Ah, thanks. I suspected something like that, but I didn't remember that theorem and was too lazy to prove it.

TheoryNoob said:
I'm sorry I should have included this in part 2 of the outline.

I am basing this proof of the following theorem:

Suppose G is a group and H is a nonempty subset of G. Then H is a subgroup of G iff a,b ∈ H implies ab^-1 ∈ H.

We have previously proved this theorem which is why I didn't mention an identity or inverse.

Sorry about the long sentence in the proof, I have it written here on paper with symbols and tried to directly type it into words.

Based off this theorem is my proof ok?
Yes, it's fine. But I think you should include something like this: Since ##b\in H## and H is a subgroup, ##b^{-1}\in H##. Since ##b\in K## and K is a subgroup, ##b^{-1}\in K##.
 
  • #6
Thanks for the help. The proof seemed to simple so I had to ask, but now that I realize all the real work for the proof is in the previous theorem it makes sense to be so short.
 
  • #7
It's actually just as simple without that theorem.

Without: Let ##a,b\in H\cap K## be arbitrary. Since H is a subgroup, we have ##e\in H##, ##a^{-1}\in H## and ##ab\in H##. Since K is a subgroup, we have ##e\in K##, ##a^{-1}\in K## and ##ab\in K##. So ##e, a^{-1}, ab\in H\cap K##.

With: Let ##a,b\in H\cap K## be arbitrary. Since H is a subgroup, ##b^{-1}\in H##. So ##a,b^{-1}\in H##. Since H is a subgroup, this implies that ##ab^{-1}\in H##. Since K is a subgroup, ##b^{-1}\in K##. So ##a,b^{-1}\in K##. Since K is a subgroup, this implies that ##ab^{-1}\in K##. So ##ab^{-1}\in H\cap K##.
 
  • #8
Thanks for the help. Your last post has given me the confidence that my answer is correct and helped clarify my understanding of the theorem.
 

What is the "Intersection of subgroups"?

The intersection of subgroups refers to the set of elements that are common to two or more subgroups of a larger group. In other words, it is the overlap between the elements of different subgroups.

Why is the "Intersection of subgroups" important in group theory?

The intersection of subgroups is important in group theory because it allows us to define and understand the structure of a larger group by studying the properties of its subgroups. It also helps us to determine if a set of subgroups is itself a subgroup of the larger group.

What is the significance of proving that the "Intersection of subgroups is a subgroup"?

Proving that the intersection of subgroups is a subgroup is significant because it allows us to generalize certain properties and characteristics of subgroups to a larger group. This can simplify the analysis and understanding of the larger group and its subgroups.

Are there any special cases where the "Intersection of subgroups" is not a subgroup?

Yes, there are special cases where the intersection of subgroups may not be a subgroup. For example, if the subgroups have different orders or if they are not normal subgroups, the intersection may not be a subgroup of the larger group.

Can the "Intersection of subgroups" be empty?

Yes, the intersection of subgroups can be empty if the subgroups do not have any common elements. This can happen when the subgroups are disjoint or have no elements in common.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
902
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
946
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
808
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
766
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top