Group (Associativity of Binary Operators)

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jeff1evesque
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Binary Group Operators
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of associativity in group theory, specifically regarding binary operators. It establishes that for a set of elements to form a group, the associative property must hold, expressed as a*(b*C) = (a*b)*c. The conversation further explores the implications of commutativity, concluding that the equality a*(b*C) = (a*b)*c = (c*a)*b is only valid if element c commutes with the product ab. This highlights the distinction between abelian and non-abelian groups, with the latter providing counterexamples to the proposed equality.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of group theory fundamentals
  • Familiarity with binary operations
  • Knowledge of commutative and non-commutative properties
  • Basic mathematical notation and logic
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of non-abelian groups in detail
  • Explore examples of binary operations that illustrate non-associativity
  • Learn about the implications of commutativity in group theory
  • Investigate the role of associativity in algebraic structures beyond groups
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of abstract algebra, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of group theory and its applications in various mathematical contexts.

jeff1evesque
Messages
312
Reaction score
0
Statement:
One of the key elements in being in what people call group is that elements must be associative.

So this means if we take any three elements from what we propose to be a group, they should be associative,
a*(b*C) = (a*b)*c

Question:
Suppose we do have a group with elements a, b, c.
Would the following be true,
a*(b*C) = (a*b)*c = (c*a)*b
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It would be true if and only if c commutes with ab. In that case, you only need associativity in a(bc) = (ab)c = c(ab) = (ca)b.
However, in general that is not true. Probably your favorite non-abelian group provides an easy counterexample.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K