How to formalize this unary operation?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mnb96
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the formalization of a unary operation within the context of two commutative groups and the preservation of this operation under an isomorphism. Participants explore the implications of adding a unary operation to groups and how to express this within the framework of universal algebra.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines an isomorphism between two commutative groups and seeks to formalize a unary operation that is preserved by this isomorphism.
  • Another participant suggests that groups with an additional unary operation can be viewed as a type of universal algebra, noting that any homomorphism should satisfy the preservation of the unary operation.
  • A participant reflects on the structure of groups from a universal-algebraic perspective, identifying the operations involved and confirming the signature of the algebra with the additional unary operation.
  • A further question is raised about formalizing statements involving subsets and elements within the context of universal algebra, questioning the need for nullary operators for each element in a potentially infinite set.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of understanding regarding the formalization of unary operations within universal algebra, with some agreeing on the general framework while others raise questions about specific formalizations and implications. The discussion remains unresolved on certain aspects, particularly regarding the treatment of subsets and infinite elements.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in expressing certain logical statements within the framework of universal algebra, highlighting the challenges of defining operations for subsets and the implications of infinite sets.

mnb96
Messages
711
Reaction score
5
Hello,
I have two commutative groups [tex](G,\circ, I_\circ)[/tex] and [tex](G,\bullet,I_\bullet)[/tex], and I defined an isomorphism [tex]f[/tex] between them: so we have [tex]f(u \circ v)=f(u) \bullet f(v)[/tex]

How can I formalize the fact that I want also an unary operation [tex]\ast : G \rightarrow G[/tex] which is preserved by the isomorphism? namely, an unary operation such that [tex]f(u^{\ast}) = f(u)^{\ast}[/tex] ?

Is it possible somehow to embed the unary operation into the group in order to form an already-known algebraic structure? or it is just not possible to formalize it better than I already did?

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know if there is a special name for "groups with an additional unary operation", but any homomorphism [itex](G,\circ,\star,1) \to (H, \bullet, *, i)[/itex] of "groups with an additional unary operation" should indeed satisfy [itex]f(x^\star) = f(x)^*[/itex].

For a theoretical sledgehammer, "groups with an additional unary operation" are an example of a universal algebra, just like groups, rings, and vector spaces over R are. (But not fields!)
 
Thanks hurkyl!
your explanation was clear and indeed, if I understood correctly, what I wanted to create is essentially an isomorphism between two (universal) algebras of signature (2,1,1,0).

In fact, from an universal-algebraic point of view, a group has three operation: one binary associative (arity=2), one inverse (arity=1), and the identity element (arity=0); when I include another unary operation of arity=1, we have (2,1,1,0) signature.

And since the homomorphic property [tex]f(u \bullet_A v)=f(u) \bullet_B f(v)[/tex] must be satisfied for every operation of n-arity, we get exactly what I wanted.

Was that correct?
 
a further question to add to what has been already discussed:

let's say I have this "group with an additional unary operation" [tex](G,\ast, I,\\ ^{-1},\\')[/tex]

which we call [tex]':G \rightarrow G[/tex]

how can I formalize in terms of universal-algebras that for a subset [tex]S \subseteq G[/tex] we always have:[tex]\forall u \in S, \\\ u'=u[/tex]As far as I understood when I'm defining a universal-algebra I cannot make any statement involving [tex]\forall, \in, \exists[/tex] and stuff like that, because one must use only operators of n-arity.
Do I really need to introduce a nullary-operator for each element in S and do something like this:

[tex]u' \ast k_1 = u[/tex]
[tex]u' \ast k_2 = u[/tex]

[tex]\ldots[/tex]

[tex]u' \ast\ k_n = u[/tex]

What if those elements are infinite?
what the signature of this algebra would be?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K