Help with Direct Sums of Groups

  • Thread starter Thread starter thoughtinknot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Groups Sums
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of direct sums of groups, specifically examining the relationship between the group of non-zero real numbers under multiplication and the direct sum of the cyclic group of order 2 and the additive group of real numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the uniqueness of representation of elements in the proposed direct sum, question the correctness of the original problem statement, and discuss the implications of isomorphism versus equality of groups.

Discussion Status

There are differing opinions on the validity of the problem statement, with some participants asserting that the question is incorrect due to the containment of sets, while others suggest that the focus should be on finding an isomorphism. The discussion is ongoing with various interpretations being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions and properties of direct sums and isomorphisms, as well as the implications of the group's structure in the context of the problem.

thoughtinknot
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let \mathbb{R}*=\mathbb{R}\{0} with multiplication operation. Show that \mathbb{R}*=\mathbb{I}2 ⊕ \mathbb{R}, where the group operation in \mathbb{R} is addition.

Homework Equations


Let {A1,...,An}\subseteqA such that for all a\inA there exists a unique sequence {ak} such that a=a1+...+an where ak\inAk for all k, then A=A1⊕...⊕An

The Attempt at a Solution


Since \mathbb{I}2={-1,1} I don't think I can show that every a*\in\mathbb{R}* can be expressed in a unique way. For example let a+=a*+1 and a-=a*-1, then a*=a+-1=a-+1. Am I defining the cyclic group of order 2 wrong? I'm not that sure about direct sums, our prof spent 5 minutes on them and 40% of our assignment involves them :S
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Am I wrong in thinking this question is incorrect since \mathbb{R} is not contained in \mathbb{R}*, thus \mathbb{R}* ≠ \mathbb{I}2 ⊕ \mathbb{R}?
 
The question is correct. Consider the exponential map.
 
thoughtinknot said:
Am I wrong in thinking this question is incorrect since \mathbb{R} is not contained in \mathbb{R}*, thus \mathbb{R}* ≠ \mathbb{I}2 ⊕ \mathbb{R}?

Well, of course the question is incorrect. The sets can not be equal. However, what the question asks is not whether the sets are equal, but whether they are isomorphic. You need to find an isomorphism between the sets.
 
Okay the exponential map...

So consider (\mathbb{R}+, x) the group of positive real numbers, where x is normal multiplication. Then there exists a mapping, exp:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}+ such that exp(r)=er.

This can easily be shown to be an isomorphism, then I can use the cyclic group \mathbb{I}2 to extend this isomorphism to the negative reals aswell.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

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