Cyclic group generator problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around properties of cyclic groups, specifically focusing on the conditions under which a power of a generator generates the entire group. The original poster presents a proof involving the order of an element and its relationship to the group structure.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the order of an element and the conditions for generating a cyclic group. Questions arise regarding the validity of certain steps in the proof and the implications of relative primality.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the proof, offering alternative perspectives and questioning assumptions. Some express uncertainty about specific steps, while others suggest clearer methods for demonstrating the main points. There is a recognition of the complexity involved in the topic.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of previous exercises that may provide foundational knowledge, but specific details are not fully elaborated. Participants also express personal sentiments about the challenges of working with cyclic groups.

radou
Homework Helper
Messages
3,149
Reaction score
8

Homework Statement



Let <a> be a cyclic group, where ord(a) = n. Then a^r generates <a> iff r and n are relatively prime.

The Attempt at a Solution



OK, let n and r be relatively prime. Then ord(a^r) = n. We need to show that for some j, there exists an integer k such that (a^r)^k = a^j. Now, every power of a equals one of the powers in <a>. Hence, for any k, a^(rk) equals some a^p. By inspecting the proof of that fact, I concluded that the power rk+1, equals a^(p+1), if we keep all the factors obtained by the division algorithm the same, and only increase the remainder by 1 (I don't see why we couldn't do this). This way, we can generate every element of <a>, and hence a^r generates <a>.

Now, for the other direction, if a^r generates <a>, and if we show that ord(a^r) = n, then we are done, since r and n must be relatively prime then (I proved this fact in another exercise). We see that (a^r)^n = (a^n)^r = e. Now, assume there is some j < n such that (a^r)^j = e. But the, since a^r is a generator of <a>, <a> would have less than n elements, contrary to the starting assumption, hence the order of a^r equals n.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All seems well! I just have a few comments:

radou said:
OK, let n and r be relatively prime. Then ord(a^r) = n.

How do you know this? Have you proven this in an earlier exercise?

We need to show that for some j, there exists an integer k such that (a^r)^k = a^j. Now, every power of a equals one of the powers in <a>. Hence, for any k, a^(rk) equals some a^p. By inspecting the proof of that fact, I concluded that the power rk+1, equals a^(p+1), if we keep all the factors obtained by the division algorithm the same, and only increase the remainder by 1 (I don't see why we couldn't do this). This way, we can generate every element of <a>, and hence a^r generates <a>.

The proof seems good, but I think you're probably making it a bit hard on yourself. This is what I did: if ord(a^r)=n, then <a^r> has n elements. But [tex]<a^r>\subseteq <a>[/tex] and <a> also has n elements. This implies immediately that <a^r>=<a>.

Now, for the other direction, if a^r generates <a>, and if we show that ord(a^r) = n, then we are done, since r and n must be relatively prime then (I proved this fact in another exercise). We see that (a^r)^n = (a^n)^r = e. Now, assume there is some j < n such that (a^r)^j = e. But the, since a^r is a generator of <a>, <a> would have less than n elements, contrary to the starting assumption, hence the order of a^r equals n.

This seems good!
 
micromass said:
How do you know this? Have you proven this in an earlier exercise?

Yes I have, I forgot to mention that!

micromass said:
The proof seems good, but I think you're probably making it a bit hard on yourself. This is what I did: if ord(a^r)=n, then <a^r> has n elements. But [tex]<a^r>\subseteq <a>[/tex] and <a> also has n elements. This implies immediately that <a^r>=<a>.

Actually, this is so obvious, you're right! It's a better way to prove it. Since (a^r)^k is a power of a, it must be one of the powers a^0, ... , a^(n-1). And this holds for any k. And because of the order, these powers must be distinct. Hence, our result is proven!

Btw, it just occurred to me that my "proof" wasn't quite valid. rk + 1 is not a factor of rk, right? And I'm only interested in powers of the form r(k+z) actually, where z is any integer.
 
radou said:
Btw, it just occurred to me that my "proof" wasn't quite valid. rk + 1 is not a factor of rk, right? And I'm only interested in powers of the form r(k+z) actually, where z is any integer.

To be honest, the proof wasn't very clear to me. So I interpreted it a bit and I thought you meant the right thing. But rk+1 is never a factor of rk, so it probably doesn't work...

I actually find working with cyclic groups to be quite annoying :biggrin: But luckily there's much more to algebra than cyclic things...
 
micromass said:
But luckily there's much more to algebra than cyclic things...

Well, I was definitely hoping for that! :wink:

Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K