Checking Axioms for a*b on the Set Z

  • Thread starter mikael27
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Axioms Set
In summary: It is not a group because the operation does not satisfy G3, as there is no element in R - {1} that is an identity element. Therefore, we do not obtain a group for this operation on this set.
  • #1
mikael27
59
0

Homework Statement



For each of the following definitions for a * b and a given set, determine which of the axioms
G0, G1, G2, G3 are satisfied by a * b. In which cases do we obtain a group?

1) a - b on the set Z
2)a + b - ab on the set R | {1}
3)ab on {2^n | n in Z}


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



The four axioms for group are:

G0 For all a, b in G, a*b in G.
G1. Associativity. For all a, b, c in G, (a * b) * c = a * (b * c).
G2. Identity. a * e = a = e * a.
G3. Inverses. a * b = e = b * a.

How am i going to check these axioms for example 1 which says a - b on the set Z ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
mikael27 said:

Homework Statement



For each of the following definitions for a * b and a given set, determine which of the axioms
G0, G1, G2, G3 are satisfied by a * b. In which cases do we obtain a group?

1) a - b on the set Z
2)a + b - ab on the set R | {1}
3)ab on {2^n | n in Z}

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



The four axioms for group are:

G0 For all a, b in G, a*b in G.
G1. Associativity. For all a, b, c in G, (a * b) * c = a * (b * c).
G2. Identity. a * e = a = e * a.
G3. Inverses. a * b = e = b * a.

How am i going to check these axioms for example 1 which says a - b on the set Z ?
If you subtract two integers, do you get another integer?

Does it matter the order you subtract integers?
Example is (2-3)-5 = 2-(3-5)?

Is there integer such any number minus that integer is the the original integer?

Is there an integer when subtracted to another integer you obtain the value(from above)?

Can you provide a counter example to any of the above? If so, you don't have a group. If not, prove them all which is somewhat trivial.
 
  • #3
Ok but how are you going to prove these axioms with just these equations and letters without giving any number. I don't understand what is happening with the letters
 
  • #4
Associative: is (a- b)- c= a- (b- c)?

Identity: does there exist an integer so that, x, such that a- x= x- a= a for all a?

Inverse: if there does exist such an a, given x, does there exist a y such that x- y= a?
 
  • #5
mikael27 said:
Ok but how are you going to prove these axioms with just these equations and letters without giving any number. I don't understand what is happening with the letters

if that is so, you have an uphill battle in learning group theory. i will try to explain, but maybe i won't do that so well.

a) to prove G0, where "*" is subtraction (that is, by a*b, we mean a-b), we need to show that for any two integers a and b, that a-b is in Z.

now, you might think, "which two integers"? it shouldn't matter. we use the letters a and b, because we aren't thinking of any two PARTICULAR numbers (like 3 and 5), but any two numbers at all.

since, there are an infinite number of integers, we just don't have the time or the space to verify a rule for "every" integer, unless we can do it SYMBOLICALLY. while certain rules for integers can indeed be proved "from scratch" (using only logic, and a suitable defintion of "integer"), I'm sure your instructor will allow the following rules about integers to be taken "as fact":

a+b is always an integer
(a+b)+c = a+(b+c)
a+b = b+a
a+0 = 0+a = a
a+(-a) = (-a)+a = 0
ab is always an integer
a(bc) = (ab)c
ab = ba
(a)(1) = (1)(a) = a
a(b+c) = ab+ac

these are all rules that you should have learned many years ago. note that these rules are only true for the integers, for other sets, they may, or may not be true.

for your first example, you need to verify G0,G1, G2 and G3 for a*b = a-b. if at any point, one of the rules fails, you can stop there. i'll leave the verification of G0 to you. it may be helpful to remember that:

a-b = a+(-b)

for G1, we have to either show:

1) a-(b-c) = (a-b)-c, for EVERY set of 3 integers {a,b,c} -OR-

2) for AT LEAST ONE set of 3 integers, a-(b-c) ≠ (a-b)-c.

suppose a and b were zero, can you think of a c which shows G1 cannot be true for all a,b,c?
 
  • #6
So for 1)

we have:

G0: For all a,b in Z , a-b in Z because a+(-b)
G1: For all a,b,c in Z (a-b)-c=a-(b-c) which is not true (how are we going to show this?)

Therefore it is not a group.
 
  • #7
mikael27 said:
So for 1)

we have:

G0: For all a,b in Z , a-b in Z because a+(-b)
G1: For all a,b,c in Z (a-b)-c=a-(b-c) which is not true (how are we going to show this?)

Therefore it is not a group.

By reading post 2.
 
  • #8
ok thanks.
Now for 2) which says a + b - ab on the set R | {1}

we have:

G0: For all a,b in R| {1} , a+b-ab in RZ because a+b+(-ab)

G1: For all a,b,c in R| {1} (a+b-ab)-c= a+b-(ab-c) ?
 
  • #9
(a*b)*c is not what you've written out. It's
a*b+c-(a*b)c = a+b-ab+c-(a+b-ab)c
 
  • #10
mikael27 said:
ok thanks.
Now for 2) which says a + b - ab on the set R | {1}

we have:

G0: For all a,b in R| {1} , a+b-ab in RZ because a+b+(-ab)

G1: For all a,b,c in R| {1} (a+b-ab)-c= a+b-(ab-c) ?

G0: For all a,b in R-{1} , a+b-ab in R-{1} because a+b+(-ab)...?

this sentence is unfinished.

it should be clear that a+b-ab is indeed a real number. the question really is, is it in R - {1}?

if not, then we do not have closure. and the sticking point here, is we need to be sure that if a,b are real numbers that aren't 1, then a+b-ab is a real number that isn't 1.

ok, suppose a+b-ab = 1. then a(1-b) + b = 1, and a(1-b) = 1 - b.

is it ok to divide by 1-b? why, or why not? what do we get after we do?
 
  • #11
ok.

a + b - ab on the set R | {1}

G0: For all a,b in R| {1} , a+b-ab in R| {1}

So we need to check that a and b are real number excluding 1 as well as the expression a+b-ab.

Let a+b-ab = 1 , a(1-b) + b = 1 and a(1-b) = 1 - b

if b is not 1 then we divide both sides by (1-b) as 1-b is not zero.

which gives a=1 which is not acceptable.

Therefore G0 does not hold.
However even if G0 does not hold and it is not a group i have to check for G1,G2,G3.

What about G1?
 
  • #12
mikael27 said:
ok.

a + b - ab on the set R | {1}

G0: For all a,b in R| {1} , a+b-ab in R| {1}

So we need to check that a and b are real number excluding 1 as well as the expression a+b-ab.

Let a+b-ab = 1 , a(1-b) + b = 1 and a(1-b) = 1 - b

if b is not 1 then we divide both sides by (1-b) as 1-b is not zero.

which gives a=1 which is not acceptable.

Therefore G0 does not hold.
However even if G0 does not hold and it is not a group i have to check for G1,G2,G3.

What about G1?

i don't think you understand what you just did.

we first supposed that a ≠ 1, b ≠ 1.

you then showed that IF a+b-ab = 1, then a = 1.

that is, a = 1 is the ONLY value for a that makes a+b-ab = 1 true, so long as b is not 1, as well.

but a = 1 is NEVER true, since a is in R - {1}. so a+b - ab is never 1, so a+b - ab is in R - {1}. this PROVES G0, not disproves it.

for G1, you need to show that (a*b)*c = a*(b*c).

(a*b)*c = (a+b-ab)*c. to evaluate this, we need to treat a+b-ab as a single number:

a+b-ab = x (x is just temporary, we'll get rid of it later).

x*c = x+c-xc...now we can "substitute a+b-ab back in for x":

(a*b)*c = (a+b-ab)*c = x*c = x+c - xc = (a+b-ab) + c - (a+b-ab)c

= a + b + c - ab - ac - bc + abc

now you evaluate what a*(b*c) is.
 
  • #13
x*c = x+c-xc. is this a rule ?
 

FAQ: Checking Axioms for a*b on the Set Z

1. What is the purpose of checking axioms for a*b on the set Z?

The purpose of checking axioms for a*b on the set Z is to ensure that the operation of multiplication (a*b) on the set of integers Z follows the defined properties, or axioms, of multiplication. This allows for consistency and coherence in mathematical reasoning and calculations.

2. What are the axioms that need to be checked for a*b on the set Z?

The axioms that need to be checked for a*b on the set Z are closure, associativity, commutativity, existence of identity element, and existence of inverse element.

3. How is the closure axiom checked for a*b on the set Z?

The closure axiom is checked by performing the operation of multiplication on any two integers in the set Z and verifying that the result is also an integer in the set Z. If the result is not an integer, then the closure axiom is not satisfied.

4. What does it mean for a*b to be commutative on the set Z?

For a*b to be commutative on the set Z means that the order of the integers being multiplied does not affect the result. In other words, a*b = b*a for any two integers a and b in the set Z.

5. Why is it important to check for the existence of an identity element for a*b on the set Z?

The existence of an identity element is important because it ensures that there is a unique integer in the set Z that, when multiplied by any other integer, will result in that integer. This allows for the preservation of the value of the other integer in the multiplication operation.

Similar threads

Back
Top