MHB Proof that Ha=Hb: Element y in Hb Proven True for Ha

  • Thread starter Thread starter onie mti
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Element Proof
onie mti
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
i was given that if y is an element in Hb then it is an element in Ha. that is Ha=Hb

proof

I said:
since y in Hb then then y= h(1)b for h(1) in H
to show that Ha=Hb
let x be an elt in Ha
hence x=h(2)a for some h(2) in H. now i am stuck
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not clear what your asking here. I suspect it is:

If $y \in Hb$ AND $y \in Ha$, THEN $Ha = Hb$.

Can you confirm this?
 
Deveno said:
It's not clear what your asking here. I suspect it is:

If $y \in Hb$ AND $y \in Ha$, THEN $Ha = Hb$.

Can you confirm this?

yes I am supposed to show that every y in Hb is in Ha thefore Ha=Hb
 
That's not quite the same thing.

What I said is:

$y \in Ha \cap Hb \implies Ha = Hb$

What you just said (in your last post) is:

$y \in Hb \implies y \in Ha$

which is NOT equivalent.

Your last statement is equivalent to saying $Hb \subseteq Ha$, which does not, in and of itself, force equality of the two cosets (we must also have $Ha \subseteq Hb$).

But what I said is an even STRONGER statement:

If two cosets have ANY element in common, they are the SAME coset.

*********

A typical proof runs something like this:

Suppose $y \in Ha \cap Hb$. This means that $y = ha$ for some $h \in H$, and that $y = h'b$ for some (typically different) element $h' \in H$.

From:

$ha = h'b$

we see that:

$b = h'^{-1}ha$

so that for any element $h''b \in Hb$, we have:

$h''b = (h''h'^{-1}h)a \in Ha$ since $H$ is a subgroup, and thus closed under multiplication and inversion.

This shows that $Hb \subseteq Ha$.

The proof that $Ha \subseteq Hb$ is similar, using the fact that $a = h^{-1}h'b$.

************

Another way to state these facts are:

Two (right) cosets of $H$ are either the same, or disjoint.

To see, this, note that what I have shown above is that if two cosets are not disjoint (having the common element $y$), they are equal.
 
onie mti said:
yes I am supposed to show that every y in Hb is in Ha thefore Ha=Hb

What you write makes no sense to me.
The first part of your sentence says:

"Show that every y in Hb is in Ha."

There is no way to know this.
So this cannot be right.
Deveno said:
It's not clear what your asking here. I suspect it is:

If $y \in Hb$ AND $y \in Ha$, THEN $Ha = Hb$.

Can you confirm this?

Erm... this makes no sense either... at least not to me.
onie mti said:
i was given that if y is an element in Hb then it is an element in Ha. that is Ha=Hb

Let me give it a try to rephrase the original problem statement.

It is given that if y is an element in Hb then it is an element in Ha.
Show that Ha=Hb.

In symbols:
$$\forall y \in Hb: y \in Ha \implies Ha=Hb$$
Or put differently:
$$Hb \subseteq Ha \implies Ha=Hb$$

Clarify?
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
959
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
688
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
739
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K