1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

If ab in G, then a and b in G?

  1. Oct 9, 2008 #1
    If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    I'm not sure I've convinced myself here.

    Take the L be the set of all linear transformations from V -> V, where V is a finite dimensional vector space. We know that G contained within L of all invertible linear transformations is a group. Say you have S, T within L and ST = I [ST is functional composition S(T(v))], where I is the identity mapping. Then it must be that ST is invertible (since we know that 1-1 <=> onto <=> invertible in L) since ST is a 1-1 and onto mapping. Which means ST in G and the inverse of (ST)^-1 = T^-1S^-1.....but this also implies that T and S are invertible and thus in G??????
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 9, 2008 #2

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    I don't understand what you're saying. You're starting with the assumption that S and T are invertible (otherwise we wouldn't have ST=I). Then you're concluding that S and T are invertible?
     
  4. Oct 9, 2008 #3
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    The only reason you say that I'm starting with S and T are invertible is because V is finite dimensional right? Since DM = I where D is the differentiation and M is the linear transformation such that for a polynomial p, then I(p) = a_0x + (a_1/2)x^2 + ... + (a_k/k+1)x^k+1 on the set of all polynomials with real coefficients yet D nor M is bijective.
     
  5. Oct 9, 2008 #4

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    Yup - in finite dimensions a linear map is invertible iff it's surjective iff it's injective.
     
  6. Oct 9, 2008 #5
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    The thing that bothers me that S and T are automatically invertible to begin with is that it is not known that TS = I.
     
  7. Oct 9, 2008 #6

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    I'm still confused. What exactly are you trying to do?
     
  8. Oct 9, 2008 #7
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    For now show TS = I. Merely to show that S and T are invertible and in G. Since we all know for groups if a and b are in G, then ab in G. In this case, do we have if ab in G, then a and b in G. Since I start with S and T in L (not known whether it is in G or not) and not every S and T in L are invertible.
     
  9. Oct 9, 2008 #8

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    Let me see if I understood that correctly. You're starting with S and T in L such that ST is invertible. And you want to determine whether or not this implies that S and T are invertible. Correct?
     
  10. Oct 9, 2008 #9
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    I'm starting with S and T in L such that ST = I.

    The only reason I say ST is invertible is because if ST is the identity mapping on a finite dimensional vector space to itself, then it must be bijective.
     
  11. Oct 9, 2008 #10

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    Yes of course in that case ST is invertible. And it's also equally obvious that S and T are invertible (in fact they're inverses of each other).
     
  12. Oct 9, 2008 #11
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    I don't think it's as obvious as you claim it is. That is to show that TS = I, thereby making T and S invertible and further making them inverses of each other.
     
  13. Oct 9, 2008 #12

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    If ST=I, then this means that T is injective and S is surjective, which in turn implies that T and S are invertible as we've already discussed.
     
  14. Oct 9, 2008 #13
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    Damn it! I knew there was something like that I was not remembering.

    Not that it matters now, there is another way to show that TS = I by using bases and image under the bases and blah blah blah...this way just seems more straightforward...

    Thanks.
     
  15. Oct 9, 2008 #14

    morphism

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    No problem.
     
  16. Oct 12, 2008 #15
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    In general, "If ab in G, then a and b in G" does not hold.
    Take G = Z (the integers) and a=b=1/2.
     
  17. Oct 14, 2008 #16
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    Clearly you meant you meant ab to mean addition and not multiplication right?
     
  18. Oct 14, 2008 #17
    Re: If ab in G, then a and b in G??

    Yes, I wrote the group multiplication multiplicatively. In the case of Z this means of course addition.:smile:
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?