Finding the Identity and Inverse of the Operation *

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter roam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bit Thinking
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the newly defined operation * on real numbers, where a * b = ab + a + b. Participants explore whether there exists an identity element for this operation and whether every real number has an inverse under this operation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the identity element e must satisfy a * e = e * a for all a, leading to the equation ae + e = 0.
  • Others argue that there is no real number e that satisfies this condition for all a, suggesting that the operation has no identity.
  • A later reply suggests that zero could be the identity, as a * 0 = a for all a.
  • Some participants confirm that zero is indeed the identity element, stating that it works for every real number.
  • Participants discuss the existence of inverses, with one proposing that for a given a, the inverse b can be expressed as b = -a/(a+1), valid for all a except -1.
  • Another participant introduces a different approach using invertible functions to define the operation and its identity and inverse.
  • Several participants emphasize the importance of algebraic methods over trial and error in finding the identity and inverses.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the existence of an identity element initially, but later contributions support zero as the identity. The discussion on the existence of inverses remains contested, with different expressions proposed for the inverse.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the operation's properties depend on the definitions used and the assumptions made about the numbers involved. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of the identity and inverse.

roam
Messages
1,265
Reaction score
12
"Define a * b, for a,b [tex]\in R[/tex] by a * b = ab+a+b. What we just have done is defined a new operation *, in terms of the well known ones multiplication and addition."

Is there a real number which is the identity under the operation * ?
Lets call this number e. A number for which a * e = e * a for all [tex]a \in R[/tex]?

Furtheremore, does every [tex]a \in R[/tex] have an inverse under this operation? ...if so, what could it be? :rolleyes:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks an awful lot like a homework problem to me!

To answer the first question, you are looking for a number e such that a*e= ae+ a+ e= a. That means ae+ e= 0 so ae= e for all a. There is no real number for which that is true so this operation has no identity.

(By the way "[itex]a*e= e*a[/itex]" is true but does NOT define the identity. for example that is true for any member of a commutative group.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
HallsofIvy said:
Looks an awful lot like a homework problem to me!

To answewr the first question, you are looking for a number e such that a*e= ae+ a+ e= a. That means ae+ e= 0 so ae= e for all a. There is no real number for which that is true so this operation has no identity.


Err... Doesn't zero have this property?
 
Yep. a * 0 = a0 + a + 0 = a.
 
Oh, bother!

Okay, now that it has an identity, you need to find inverses for this operation. If b is a's inverse, then ab+ a+ b= 0. Solve for b.
 
I think so too. But if e is the identity, we should have a*e = ae+a+e=a and e*a=ea+e+a=a
=> e(a+1)=0 and e = 0 :wink: And yes 0 is the only solutions that works for every [tex]a \in R[/tex]

In order to find the inverse we want for every a, a real number b for which a*b=ab+a+b=e=0

Then b(a+1)=0 => [tex]b= \frac{-a}{a+1}[/tex] and we DO have an inverse under this operation for every real number except -1, by letting the inverse of a be the number [tex]\frac{-a}{a+1}[/tex].

:biggrin:
 
Take any invertible function f:R->R and you can define an operation a*b = f-1( f(a) f(b) ). The identity is f-1(1). The inverse of a is f-1(1/f(a)).
 
Yep, the answer is 0.

But just try different numbers to find an identity. Eventually you'll find it. Or you can do it algebraically:

a * b = ab + a + b = a (true for identity, since a * b = a)

ab + a + b = a

ab + b = 0;

(a+1)b = 0

For a = -1, any b is an identity. For a [tex]\neq[/tex] -1, b = 0.
 
Alex6200 said:
Yep, the answer is 0.

But just try different numbers to find an identity. Eventually you'll find it. Or you can do it algebraically:

a * b = ab + a + b = a (true for identity, since a * b = a)

ab + a + b = a

ab + b = 0;

(a+1)b = 0

For a = -1, any b is an identity. For a [tex]\neq[/tex] -1, b = 0.

Just trying numbers is not a good method, especially when there are uncountably many to choose from. And b=0 works even when a=-1.
 
  • #10
d_leet said:
Just trying numbers is not a good method, especially when there are uncountably many to choose from. And b=0 works even when a s1.

Yeah, solving it algebraically seems like a good approach.
 
  • #11
d_leet said:
Just trying numbers is not a good method, especially when there are uncountably many to choose from. And b=0 works even when a=-1.

I think the definable numbers would suffice, and they're countable. So it's not too hard after all. o:)
 
  • #12
roam said:
Is there a real number which is the identity under the operation * ?
Lets call this number e. A number for which a * e = e * a for all [tex]a \in R[/tex]?

Note that since a and b are real numbers and multiplication and addition of real numbers are commutative, a*b = b*a for all real numbers a and b:

a*b = ab + a + b = ba + b + a = b*a, where in the centre we use the fact that ab = ba for real numbers and a + b = b + a for real numbers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K