Definition of a group with redundancy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Syrus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition Group
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A group is defined as a non-empty set G equipped with a binary operation * that satisfies specific axioms. The discussion highlights the redundancy in stating that G is closed under the binary operation, as defining a binary operation as a function *: G × G → G inherently implies closure. Authors often include the closure property in definitions to accommodate readers who may not yet understand binary operations as functions. This clarification emphasizes the importance of precise definitions in mathematical discourse.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of group theory and its axioms
  • Familiarity with binary operations in mathematics
  • Knowledge of functions and their properties
  • Basic comprehension of set theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the axioms of group theory in detail
  • Explore the concept of binary operations and their definitions
  • Learn about functions in mathematics, particularly in the context of set theory
  • Investigate various definitions of groups in different mathematical texts
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in foundational concepts of group theory and binary operations.

Syrus
Messages
213
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I would define a group as follows:

A group consists of a non-empty set G together with a binary operation (say, *) on G such that the following axioms hold:

G1...G2...G3...



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I know this is a trivial question, but doesn't a binary operation on a set (here G) necesserily imply that the set is closed under that binary operation? The only reason i ask is that many of the definitions of groups I have come across include both that * is a binary operation under which G is closed. Isn't this redundant?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It all depends on how you define a binary operation. I would define it as a function

[tex]*:G\times G\rightarrow G[/tex]

If you define a binary operation like that, then the property you mention is indeed redundant.

I guess, that many authors include that property because most readers aren't yet ready to view a binary operation as a function. So to make it easy on them, they include the axiom that G is closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K