MHB Proof the set with the multiplication is a group

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the set {(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times} forms an abelian group under multiplication for n>1. The user confirms closure and associativity of multiplication within the set, establishing that if [a] and [b] are elements, then their product [a][b] remains in the set. The identity element is identified as [1], which satisfies the identity property for all elements in the set. The main challenge lies in demonstrating the existence of left-side inverses for each element. The response suggests using the commutativity of multiplication to assist in proving the existence of these inverses.
cbarker1
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
345
Reaction score
23
Dear Everyone,

$\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb{Z}}$Suppose the set is defined as:
$\begin{equation*}
{(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}=\left\{\bar{a}\in \Z/n\Z|\ \text{there exists a}\ \bar{c}\in \Z/n\Z\ \text{with}\ \bar{a}\cdot\bar{c}=1\right\}
\end{equation*}$
for $n>1$
I am having some trouble
Proving that ${(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$ is an abelian group under multiplication on ${(\Z/n\Z)}$.

My Attempt:
  • WTS: Multiplication on ${(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$ is closed.
By exercise 5 in homework 2, if $[a], \in {(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$, then $[a]\cdot \in {(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$. So we know that multiplication is closed under ${(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$.

  • Associativity:
Let $[a],,[c]\in{(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$ . We know that the $\Z$ is associative.
$[a]\cdot(\cdot[c])=[a] \cdot [bc]=[abc]=[ab] \cdot [c]=([a]\cdot) \cdot [c]$.
  • Identity
We know that $[1]$ is the identity for ${(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$.
$[1]\cdot[x]=[1\cdot x]= [x], \forall [x] \in {(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$
$[x] \cdot [1]=[x \cdot 1]=[x], \forall [x] \in {(\Z/n\Z)}^{\times}$
  • inverse
We are given the right side inverse by the definition of the set. We need to show that the left side exist ( here is where I am having troubles).

Thanks,
Cbarker1
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Cbarker1,

Let's do commutativity first:
$$\forall [a],\in(\mathbb Z/n\mathbb Z)^\times:[a]\cdot=[ab]=[ba]=\cdot[a]$$

Now we can apply commutativity of multiplication to find the left side inverse.
 
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 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
834
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
818
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
925
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K