MHB Multiplicative Inverse Proof Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter A.Magnus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse Proof
A.Magnus
Messages
138
Reaction score
0
I am working on a proof problem on ordered field from a textbook, which lists additive and multiplicative properties similar to the ones here:

If $x \ne 0$, show that $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = x.$

The followings are what I was able to come out -- I just wanted to make sure that they are acceptable:

(a) By the multiplicative inverse property, there must exists $\frac{1}{x}$ such that $\frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = 1$.

(b) By the same property, there must exists $x$ such that $\frac{1}{x} \cdot x = 1$.

(c) By equating the (a) and (b) above, we have $\frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = \frac{1}{x} \cdot x$.

(d) By multiplying both sides with $x$, then we have $x \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = x \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot x$, showing that $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = x$, as desired.

Thank you for your time and gracious helps. ~MA
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MaryAnn said:
I am working on a proof problem on ordered field from a textbook, which lists additive and multiplicative properties similar to the ones here:

The followings are what I was able to come out -- I just wanted to make sure that they are acceptable:

(a) By the multiplicative inverse property, there must exists $\frac{1}{x}$ such that $\frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = 1$.

Hey again MaryAnn,

This is not quite correct.
Instead we have that given $x\ne 0$ by the multiplicative inverse property, there must exist an $\frac{1}{x}$ such that $\frac{1}{x} \cdot x = 1$.

Now we know that $\frac{1}{x}$, but we do not know if it is equal to $0$ or not.
Therefore we cannot deduce yet either that its multiplicative inverse exists, can we?
It's only as soon as we can conclude that $\frac{1}{x}\ne 0$, that we can conclude by the multiplicate inverse property that $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$ must exist, and that $\frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = 1$.

MaryAnn said:
(b) By the same property, there must exists $x$ such that $\frac{1}{x} \cdot x = 1$.

This is the wrong way around. We conclude from the existence of $x\ne 0$ that $\frac 1x$ exists.

MaryAnn said:
(c) By equating the (a) and (b) above, we have $\frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = \frac{1}{x} \cdot x$.

This is a correct deduction.

MaryAnn said:
(d) By multiplying both sides with $x$, then we have $x \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = x \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot x$, showing that $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} = x$, as desired.

This is true, but you are skipping a couple of steps, and you are not mentioning which properties you are using.
As it is, you are using the property of associativity (twice), the property of the multiplicative inverse (twice), and the property of unity (twice).

MaryAnn said:
Thank you for your time and gracious helps. ~MA
 
Thank you for your response! ~MA
 
How about these revised steps - hope these come out right:

(a) Since $x \neq 0$, there must exist $\frac{1}{x}$ such that $x \cdot \frac{1}{x} = 1$. (Multiplicative Inverse Property)

(b) By Commutative Property, we have $\frac{1}{x} \cdot x = 1$.

(c) Multiplying both sides of the equation by $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$, we have $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot x = 1 \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$.

(d) By Property of Unity, in the right hand side we have $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$.

(e) By Associative Property, we then have $(\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot \frac{1}{x}) \cdot x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$.

(f) By Property of Unity, we finally have $1 \cdot x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$, and by the same property again $x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$, as desired.

Thank you again for all your helps. ~MA
 
MaryAnn said:
How about these revised steps - hope these come out right:

(a) Since $x \neq 0$, there must exist $\frac{1}{x}$ such that $x \cdot \frac{1}{x} = 1$. (Multiplicative Inverse Property)

(b) By Commutative Property, we have $\frac{1}{x} \cdot x = 1$.

(c) Multiplying both sides of the equation by $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$, we have $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot x = 1 \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$.

Careful, we should multiply on the same side, since we should not assume commutativity of multiplication.
And we should not assume associativity by leaving out the parentheses.
So it should be: $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot \left(\frac{1}{x} \cdot x\right) = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot 1$

MaryAnn said:
(d) By Property of Unity, in the right hand side we have $\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot \frac{1}{x} \cdot x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$.

(e) By Associative Property, we then have $(\frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}} \cdot \frac{1}{x}) \cdot x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$.

(f) By Property of Unity, we finally have $1 \cdot x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$, and by the same property again $x = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{x}}$, as desired.

That's the property of multiplicative inverse instead of unity.
The second part is using the property of unity though.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top