Finite Order in Quotient Groups: Q/Z and R/Q

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Every element of the quotient group Q/Z has finite order, while only the identity element of R/Q possesses finite order. Elements in Q/Z can be expressed as Z + r/s, where adding the element s times yields an integer. In contrast, nonidentity elements of R/Q take the form Q + r with r being irrational, leading to a contradiction when attempting to express n*(Q + r) = Q, confirming that these elements do not have finite order.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quotient groups in group theory
  • Familiarity with rational and irrational numbers
  • Knowledge of finite order elements in group theory
  • Basic algebraic manipulation of equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of finite order elements in group theory
  • Explore the structure of quotient groups, specifically Q/Z and R/Q
  • Learn about the implications of irrational numbers in algebraic structures
  • Investigate the relationship between normal subgroups and quotient groups
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of abstract algebra, and anyone interested in group theory and its applications in understanding the properties of quotient groups.

3029298
Messages
56
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that every element of the quotient group \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} has finite order but that only the identity element of \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q} has finite order.

The Attempt at a Solution


The first part of the question I solved. Since each element of \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} is of the form \mathbb{Z}+\frac{r}{s} if we add this element s times to itself, we get all \mathbb{Z} back, since s\frac{r}{s}=r. But for the second part of the question I have no clue... Can anyone hint me in the right direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, so a nonidentity element of R/Q has the form Q+r, where r is irrational. What would be wrong with n*(Q+r)=Q?
 
Dick said:
Ok, so a nonidentity element of R/Q has the form Q+r, where r is irrational. What would be wrong with n*(Q+r)=Q?

n*(Q+r)=n*r+Q since Q is normal. has it got something to do with the fact that for p=prime 1/p cannot be written as the sum of two rationals?
 
oh no... 1/7=1/14+1/14
 
3029298 said:
n*(Q+r)=n*r+Q since Q is normal. has it got something to do with the fact that for p=prime 1/p cannot be written as the sum of two rationals?

If x+Q=Q what can you say about x? This has nothing to do with primes.
 
Dick said:
If x+Q=Q what can you say about x? This has nothing to do with primes.

If x is not Q, then this can never be true, since the sum of a non-rational and a rational number is non-rational.

If x is in Q then x+Q = Q since for each element q in Q there exists an element q-x in Q which gives x+q-x=q, and each element in x+Q is in Q.

x must be a rational.
 
Dick said:
Ok, so a nonidentity element of R/Q has the form Q+r, where r is irrational. What would be wrong with n*(Q+r)=Q?

The only thing confusing me a little from the beginning is that if we have a nonidentity element of R/Q it has to have the form Q+r where r is irrational. Does r have to be irrational because Q is the identity of R/Q?
 
I get it now! If x+Q=Q, x must be rational. Therefore, a nonidentity element of R/Q has the form Q+r where r is irrational. Now if n*(Q+r)=Q, n*r+Q=Q and n*r is rational. But this cannot be the case since r is irrational, and we have a contradiction, and a nonidentity element of R/Q does not have finite order.
Thanks for the hints ;)
 

Similar threads

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