MHB The Category Grp - Aluffi - Section 3.3 - basic question/clarification

  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Section
Click For Summary
In Section 3.3 of Paolo Aluffi's "Algebra: Chapter 0," the function \( i_G: G \to G \) defined as \( i(g) := g^{-1} \) raises questions about notation and the role of identity elements versus inverses. The distinction between \( i_G \) and \( i \) is clarified, as both refer to the same function applicable to all groups without causing confusion. The discussion also highlights that any semi-group homomorphism between groups is inherently a group homomorphism, preserving both the identity element and inverses. This preservation is significant, as it contrasts with monoids, where semi-group homomorphisms do not necessarily maintain the identity element. The clarification emphasizes the unique properties of group homomorphisms in relation to their structure.
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Paolo Aluffi's book, Algebra: Chapter 0.

I am studying Chapter II: Groups, first encounter. In Section 3 of this chapter, Aluffi deals with the category Grp in which the objects are groups and the morphisms are group homomorphisms.

Section 3,3, which is a pause for reflection, reads as follows:View attachment 2668

I am somewhat confused by the specific function described in that Aluffi writes:

$$ i_G \: \ G \to G , \ \ i(g) := g^{-1} $$.I have two rather simple questions:

1. Why do we have $$ i_G $$ in one place and $$ i $$ in the other - that is, shouldn't the above read $$ i_G \: \ G \to G , \ \ i_G(g) := g^{-1} $$?

2. Aluffi mentions both the identity element and inverses, but the function he considers seems to only deal with inverses? What is going on?

I realize that these are pretty simple issues, but would appreciate someone clarifying the situation for me.

Peter

***EDIT*** I have been reflecting on the above and now feel, regarding question 2 above, that I misunderstood what Aluffi was saying - the function specified only referred to inverses.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
1. Yes. But the map $i$ and $m$ as well are defined the same way for all groups $G$, so no confusion should occur.

2. The point is: any SEMI-GROUP homomorphism between groups is also a group homomorphism, since for any homomorphism:

$\varphi: G \to G'$

we have:

$\varphi(e_G) = e_{G'}$

$\varphi(g^{-1}) = [\varphi(g)]^{-1}$

which high-lights something about "group-ness", just preserving the map $m$ (in the sense that:

$\varphi \circ m_G = m_{G'} \circ (\varphi \times \varphi)$)

ensures that $\varphi$ preserves $i$ and $e$ (which we can think of as a "special" map $e:1 \to G$):

$\varphi \circ i_G = i_{G'} \circ \varphi$

$\varphi \circ e_G = e_{G'}$

To see why this is special, note that a similar assertion is NOT TRUE for monoids: a semi-group homomorphism between monoids does NOT necessarily preserve the identity, and this condition must be stipulated as an additional condition to have a monoid homomorphism.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K