Isomorphism between groups of real numbers

Click For Summary
There exists an isomorphism between the additive group of real numbers (ℝ,+) and the multiplicative group of positive real numbers (ℝ_{>0},×), defined by the exponential function f(x)=e^x. Despite both sets being uncountably infinite, they can still have the same cardinality, allowing for a bijection. The exponential function demonstrates a homomorphism, satisfying the property e^(a+b) = e^a * e^b. This relationship highlights the connection between abstract algebra concepts and familiar mathematical functions. Understanding this isomorphism can lead to significant insights in algebra.
blahblah8724
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Apparently there is an isomorphism between the additive group (ℝ,+) of real numbers and the multiplicative group (ℝ_{>0},×) of positive real numbers.

But I thought that the reals were uncountably infinite and so don't understand how you could define a bijection between them?!

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The isomorphism is f(x)=e^x.

But I thought that the reals were uncountably infinite and so don't understand how you could define a bijection between them?!

Could you explain more about what's bothering you??
 
There exist a bijection between two sets if and only if they have the same cardinality (that is, essentiallt, the definition of "cardinality"). The fact that two sets are both uncountably infinite doesn't mean they do not have the same cardinality.
 
blahblah8724 said:
Apparently there is an isomorphism between the additive group (ℝ,+) of real numbers and the multiplicative group (ℝ_{>0},×) of positive real numbers.

Yes, and you are already very familiar with it: It's just the exponential function y = e^x. For all real numbers a and b we have e^(a+b) = e^a * e^b. That fits the definition of a homomorphism. Then note that e*x is a bijection between the additive reals and the multiplicative positive reals.

Does that help in terms of seeing the concreteness and familiarity of this isomorphism?

ps -- That's why e^0 = 1. A homomorphism always maps the identity to the identity. I vividly remember being in my first abstract algebra class and slogging through homomorphisms and normal subgroups ... then they mentioned that exp and log are isomorphisms ... and I got this AHA moment -- this stuff is actually about something!

pps -- I see Micromass already mentioned e^x. Hopefully I was able to add some detail for the OP's benefit.
 
Last edited:
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
555
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
878
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K