Proving the Property (a^-1)^-1 = a in a Group | Homework Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Benzoate
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the property \((a^{-1})^{-1} = a\) within the context of group theory. Participants are exploring the definitions and properties of inverses in groups.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants question the validity of using exponent notation in the context of group inverses. Others suggest focusing on the definition of the inverse and its properties. There are attempts to manipulate equations involving the identity element of the group and to clarify the relationship between an element and its inverse.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing different perspectives on the proof. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of definitions and properties of inverses, but there is no explicit consensus on the methods being used.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating potential misunderstandings regarding notation and the definitions of inverses in group theory. There is an emphasis on ensuring clarity in the application of group properties.

Benzoate
Messages
420
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



In a group, prove that (a^-1)^-1

Homework Equations



no equations required

The Attempt at a Solution



the inverse of a is 1/a and the inverse of 1/a is a. therefore , (a^-1)^-1 = a for all a.

Also for the property of an exponent, (a^n)^m=a^(m*n)
so , (a^-1)^-1=a^(-1*-1)=a,

There for (a^-1)^-1 = a for all a

Did I use the right methods for proving that (a^-1)^-1 =a?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, no, the exponent method is not okay. It has nothing to do with this problem in group theory. The exponent "-1" is just a shorthand notation for the inverse in a group, it's not the exponent one meets when working with numbers, real, complex, etc.

So let's see

Do you agree that

[tex]\left(a^{-1}\right)^{-1} \cdot a^{-1} = e[/tex] ??

"e" is the identity in the group.

If so, if you agree, then consider multiplying the whole relation to the right by "a". See what you get.
 
Last edited:
dextercioby said:
No, no, the exponent method is not okay. It has nothing to do with this problem in group theory. The exponent "-1" is just a shorthand notation for the inverse in a group, it's not the exponent one meets when working with numbers, real, complex, etc.

So let's see

Do you agree that

[tex]\left(a^{-1}\right)^{-1} \cdot a^{-1} = e[/tex] ??

"e" is the identity in the group.

If so, if you agree, then consider multiplying the whole relation to the right by "a". See what you get.

This method seems circular. Here are the results of my new proof:

(a^-1)^-1 * a^-1 -e => a^(-1*-1) *a^(-1)=a^0 =1 =e

by multiplying a on both sides I get
a*((a^(-1))^-1 *a^-1) = a*e

a*(a^(-1*-1) *a^-1)=e*a
a*(a*a^(-1))=ea
a's cancel out
(a*a^(-1))=e

since e also equals (a^-1)^-1 *a^-1) , then (a*a^(-1))= (a^-1)^-1 *a^(-1)

therefore

((a^(-1))^-1)=a for all a?

Aren't suppose to multiply e on both sides as opposed to multiplying a?
 
Last edited:
Come on

[tex]\left(a^{-1}\right)^{-1}\cdot\left(a^{-1}\cdot a \right)=e\cdot a[/tex]

I used the associativity of the group operation. Now make the 2 multiplications, one inside the bracket and one in the RHS of the eq. What do u get ?
 
What is the definition of the inverse of a? It is certainly NOT 1/a.
 
[tex]a^{-1}[/tex] is inverse of [tex]a[/tex], i.e. [tex]aa^{-1} = a^{-1} a = 1[/tex].
So we see that [tex]a[/tex] is inverse of [tex]a^{-1}[/tex] which means, [tex](a^{-1})^{-1} = a[/tex].
 
Benzoate said:
This method seems circular.

no, it's no circular. He was explaining to you that you must use the definition of the (left) inverse. I.e., for any element [tex]g^{}[/tex] of the group, the inverse [tex]g^{-1}[/tex] satisfies
[tex] g^{-1}\cdot g = e[/tex]
where the symbol [tex]e^{}[/tex] stands of the identity element of the group.

Maybe the notation [tex]g^{-1}[/tex] for the inverse of [tex]g[/tex] is too familiar for its own good. You could try a different notation. For example, you could denote the inverse of [tex]g[/tex] as
[tex]\bar g[/tex]. Then, the definition of the inverse says that
[tex] \bar g \cdot g = e[/tex]

To prove the equality you mentioned, first simply rename the element [tex]g[/tex] to [tex]\bar a[/tex] (which is an element of the group if [tex]a[/tex] is, by definition) to see that
[tex] \bar \bar a \cdot \bar a = e[/tex]
(which is just using the definition of inverse for [tex]\bar a[/tex]).

Next, rename the element [tex]g[/tex] to [tex]a[/tex] to see that
[tex] \bar a \cdot a = e[/tex]
(which, is just using the definition of inverse for a).

If you multiply the above equation on the left by [tex]\bar \bar a[/tex] and the equation two-above on the right by [tex]a[/tex] you will see that the LH sides are equal and thus the RH sides are also equal which gives you the equality you desire.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K