Inner Automorphism: Clarifying Notation Confusion

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Gale
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the concept of inner automorphisms in group theory, specifically focusing on the notation and variables involved. It establishes that both g and x belong to the group G, and that the function f_g(x) = gxg⁻¹ is a function of x while g remains fixed. The participants confirm that when proving properties like surjectivity or injectivity, only x varies, while g is constant. Additionally, it is noted that in an abelian group, all inner automorphisms are the identity function, requiring proof that f_g equals the identity for all g in G.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of group theory concepts, specifically groups and automorphisms.
  • Familiarity with the notation of functions and bijections in mathematics.
  • Knowledge of properties of functions, including injectivity, surjectivity, and bijectivity.
  • Basic understanding of abelian groups and their characteristics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the definition and properties of inner automorphisms in group theory.
  • Learn about the relationship between inner automorphisms and permutations in mathematical contexts.
  • Explore proofs involving injectivity and surjectivity in the context of group homomorphisms.
  • Investigate the implications of abelian groups on the structure of inner automorphisms.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students of abstract algebra, particularly those studying group theory, as well as educators and mathematicians seeking to clarify the concept of inner automorphisms and their notation.

Gale
Messages
683
Reaction score
1
I'm working some homework where we're introduced to inner automorphisms. I have that G is a group. Given a fixed g in G, and fg:G → G, fg(x)= gxg-1.

I'm just a little confused about the notation. Are both g and x in G? I've been reading through the wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_automorphism and that seems to be the case, however when I'm working on proofs I wasn't sure which variable I was supposed to be working with.

For instance, if I'm proving surjectivity, (or injectivity or bijectivity) I would want to show f(x1)=f(x2), however I would assume g stays fixed, correct? But when I'm proving f has an inverse, I would prove that (fg)-1=fg-1, which is using a different fixed g in G? Similarly, The wiki says that when G is abelian, the inner automorphism contains only the identity, but if I wanted to prove that, would I work with two different g's or two different x's?

I have a vague idea of how this relates to permutations, but it's not sinking in and my hang ups about the notation is preventing me from understanding a lot of what I'm reading. f is a permutation function? Or is G a set of permutations? Actually, now I'm confusing myself even worse. Could someone clarify for me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Gale said:
I'm working some homework where we're introduced to inner automorphisms. I have that G is a group. Given a fixed g in G, and fg:G → G, fg(x)= gxg-1.

I'm just a little confused about the notation. Are both g and x in G?

Yes.

I've been reading through the wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_automorphism and that seems to be the case, however when I'm working on proofs I wasn't sure which variable I was supposed to be working with.

For instance, if I'm proving surjectivity, (or injectivity or bijectivity) I would want to show f(x1)=f(x2), however I would assume g stays fixed, correct?

Correct. Every g induces an inner automorphism [itex]f_g[/itex]. The function [itex]f_g[/itex] is a function of x, so only x is variable.

But when I'm proving f has an inverse, I would prove that (fg)-1=fg-1, which is using a different fixed g in G?

Yes.

Similarly, The wiki says that when G is abelian, the inner automorphism contains only the identity, but if I wanted to prove that, would I work with two different g's or two different x's?

You need to prove that each function [itex]f_g[/itex] is equal to the identity.

I have a vague idea of how this relates to permutations, but it's not sinking in and my hang ups about the notation is preventing me from understanding a lot of what I'm reading. f is a permutation function? Or is G a set of permutations? Actually, now I'm confusing myself even worse. Could someone clarify for me?

A permutation of a set X is by definition a bijection [itex]g:X\rightarrow X[/itex]. Any inner automorphism [itex]f_g[/itex] is a permutation on G since it is bijective.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K