Question on a proof by induction

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mnb96
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the appropriate base case for induction when proving properties of a subgroup S generated by a set A, specifically whether to use n=0 or n=1. It is established that if the property to be proved holds for all n≥0, then n=0 is the correct base case, corresponding to the identity element of the group. Conversely, if the property only requires proof for n≥1, then n=1 is suitable. The conversation also highlights that proofs involving induction on the length of expressions can be applied to Abelian groups, where the commutativity of elements allows for flexible manipulation of products.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of group theory, specifically subgroups and generated sets.
  • Familiarity with mathematical induction and its application in proofs.
  • Knowledge of Abelian groups and their properties.
  • Basic concepts of identity elements in group theory.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of mathematical induction in depth.
  • Explore the properties of Abelian groups and their implications in proofs.
  • Investigate different types of base cases in induction proofs.
  • Learn about subgroup generation and its applications in group theory.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of abstract algebra, and anyone interested in understanding induction proofs in the context of group theory.

mnb96
Messages
711
Reaction score
5
Hello,
I have a subgroup [itex]S=\left\langle A \right\rangle[/itex] generated by the set A, i.e. [itex]S=\left\{ a_1 a_2 \ldots a_n \;|\; a_i \in A \right\}[/itex].

When I need to prove by induction on n some property of S, what should I choose as the base case of induction? n=1, or simply n=0 ?

If the answer is n=0, then it seems to me that in most cases associated with "subgroups generated by some set", we always have to define n=0 as corresponding to the identity element, thus the basis of induction will be always about proving that some property holds for the identity element. Am I right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, I would say that this depends upon how the statement to be proved is formulated. If it says that it should hold for all n>=0, then your interpretation is correct in my opinion. If it should hold only for all n>=1, the problem does not occur.
 
mnb96 said:
Hello,
I have a subgroup [itex]S=\left\langle A \right\rangle[/itex] generated by the set A, i.e. [itex]S=\left\{ a_1 a_2 \ldots a_n \;|\; a_i \in A \right\}[/itex].

When I need to prove by induction on n some property of S, what should I choose as the base case of induction? n=1, or simply n=0 ?

If the answer is n=0, then it seems to me that in most cases associated with "subgroups generated by some set", we always have to define n=0 as corresponding to the identity element, thus the basis of induction will be always about proving that some property holds for the identity element. Am I right?

Proofs such as you've described typically involve induction on the length of the expression. For example if a group is Abelian, meaning ab = ba, you can use induction to show that you can freely permute the factors of a product of n elements.

Without more info it's difficult to answer your question. In the most general case you can start an induction anywhere.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K