Are Perplex Numbers on R2 a Field According to the Axioms?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of the set R2 with defined binary operations for addition and multiplication, referred to as perplex numbers. Participants are tasked with demonstrating the associativity of multiplication and determining whether the structure forms a field according to field axioms.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definitions of addition and multiplication, questioning the clarity of the operations. Some express uncertainty about how to begin proving the field properties, particularly regarding the multiplicative inverse.

Discussion Status

Some participants have made progress, with one confirming the associativity of multiplication. Others are still grappling with the requirements for a field, particularly the existence of multiplicative inverses, and are sharing their reasoning and findings.

Contextual Notes

There is confusion regarding the definition of the operations, particularly a potential typo in the addition definition. Participants are also referencing the field axioms and discussing the implications of the multiplicative inverse in the context of the problem.

evad1089
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



On R2, define the binary operators
(x,y)+(u,v)=(x+u,y+v)
(x,y)+(u,v)=(xu+yv,xv+yu)
The set R2, along with these definitions of addition and multiplication, for the perplex numbers.
(a) Show that [tex]\cdot[/tex]: R2 [tex]\rightarrow[/tex] R is associative.
(b) Either prove or disprove: The triple (R2,+,[tex]\cdot[/tex]) is a field.

Homework Equations



Definition of a field.

The Attempt at a Solution



Well, I really have no idea where to start. I have been reading the definition a field over and over and cannot seem to get a grip on the beginning of the proof. I believe on part b I would need to prove/disprove the described field fits the 6 (according to my notes) field axioms. Part a, I am not even sure what it is asking. Just a little help starting is all I should need. My book has nothing on this particular area and my usual resource Wikipedia, has just confused me more (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-complex_number).

Thank you in advance,
Dave
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
For (a), take 3 arbitrary elements from your set R^2 and show that the operation defined is associative. That is, a * (b * c) = (a * b) * c, where a,b,c are members of your set (R^2, and * is the operation defined.)

For (b), to disprove it, you should find one field axiom it does not obey. If you can't find one, then go through all of the axioms.
 
So, I have figured out part a. Turns out a was (dot) (colon) R2 -> R2 not (therefore) R2 -> R.

For anyone in the same boat as me here is the solution.

Suppose (a,b), (c,d), (e,f) [tex]\in[/tex] R2, we will show (a,b) [tex]\bullet[/tex] ((c,d)[tex]\bullet[/tex](e,f)) = ((a,b) [tex]\bullet[/tex] (c,d))[tex]\bullet[/tex](e,f).
1. (a,b) [tex]\bullet[/tex] ((c,d)[tex]\bullet[/tex](e,f)) = (a,b) [tex]\bullet[/tex] (ce+df,cf+d3)
2. =(ace+adf+bcf+bde,acf+ade+bce+bdf)
3. ((a,b) [tex]\bullet[/tex] (c,d))[tex]\bullet[/tex](e,f) = (ac+bd,ad+bc)[tex]\bullet[/tex](e,f)
4. =(ace+bdf+adf+bcf,acf+bdf+ade+bce)
5. =(ace+adf+bcf+bde,acf+ade+bce+bdf)
Since line 2 equals line 5, with a little substitution, (a,b) [tex]\bullet[/tex] ((c,d)[tex]\bullet[/tex](e,f)) = ((a,b) [tex]\bullet[/tex] (c,d))[tex]\bullet[/tex](e,f). Therefore, [tex]\bullet[/tex] : R2 -> R2 is associative.
 
Now I am still seriously puzzled about b. I am pretty sure that it is not a field, but it seems to fit every axiom. It is associative and commutative for addition and multiplication. And seems to be distributive for multiplication over addition. There appears to be an additive identity of (0,0), a multiplicative identity of (1,0). I see no problem with the field having a additive inverse.

Well this leaves the multiplicative inverse; I believe this might be the key to proving (R2,+,[tex]\bullet[/tex]) is not a field, but as to proving this idea, I am at a loss.
 
evad1089 said:

Homework Statement



On R2, define the binary operators
(x,y)+(u,v)=(x+u,y+v)
(x,y)+(u,v)=(xu+yv,xv+yu)
Do you have a typo in the second line above? Otherwise you have defined addition in two ways.
evad1089 said:
The set R2, along with these definitions of addition and multiplication, for the perplex numbers.
(a) Show that [tex]\cdot[/tex]: R2 [tex]\rightarrow[/tex] R is associative.
(b) Either prove or disprove: The triple (R2,+,[tex]\cdot[/tex]) is a field.

Homework Equations



Definition of a field.

The Attempt at a Solution



Well, I really have no idea where to start. I have been reading the definition a field over and over and cannot seem to get a grip on the beginning of the proof. I believe on part b I would need to prove/disprove the described field fits the 6 (according to my notes) field axioms. Part a, I am not even sure what it is asking. Just a little help starting is all I should need. My book has nothing on this particular area and my usual resource Wikipedia, has just confused me more (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-complex_number).

Thank you in advance,
Dave
 
Yes. The second one is supposed to be (x,y)[tex]\bullet[/tex](u,v)=(xu+yv,xv+yu).
 
Well I figured out b.

Since one of the requirements of a field is that the multiplicative inverse is defined for all elements of the field. We can prove the triple (R2,+,[tex]\bullet[/tex]) is not a field. As a side note the multiplicative identity of this non field is (1,0).

Suppose (3,3)[tex]\in[/tex]R2 has a multiplicative inverse, (a,b). Then (3,3)[tex]\bullet[/tex](a,b)=(1,0). Evaluating the left side we obtain, (3a+3b,3b+3a)=(1,0). Since 3a+3b=3b+3a, but 1[tex]\neq[/tex]0, this is a contradiction. Therefore (3,3)[tex]\in[/tex]R2 does not have a multiplicative inverse. Since one of the reuirements of a field is the multiplicative inverse is defined for all members of the field, the triple (R2,+,[tex]\bullet[/tex]) is not a field.

Uhhhh... well I guess good luck to the next person. Hope this helps.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K