I The proof of the above theorem is similar to the proof of the above statement.

Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44
We define a cyclic group to be one all of whose elements can be written as "powers" of a single element, so G is cyclic if ##G= \{a^n ~|~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}## for some ##a \in G##. Is it true that in this case, ##G = \{ a^0, a^1, a^2, ... , a^{n-1} \}##? If so, why? And why do we write a cyclic group as ##\{a^n ~|~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}##, where n is allowed to be any integer, except just those 0 through n - 1?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mr Davis 97 said:
We define a cyclic group to be one all of whose elements can be written as "powers" of a single element, so G is cyclic if ##G= \{a^n ~|~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}## for some ##a \in G##.
Yes. And until now, nothing is said about the order of ##a##. It can be of finite order or of infinite order.
In the first case, say ##a^m=1## we get ##(G,\cdot) \cong (\mathbb{Z}_m,+)## and in the second case ##(G,\cdot) \cong (\mathbb{Z},+)##
Is it true that in this case, ##G = \{ a^0, a^1, a^2, ... , a^{n-1} \}##?
Where's the rest of the sentence? Is it true that in case ##G \cong \mathbb{Z}_n## ... what?
If so, why? And why do we write a cyclic group as ##\{a^n ~|~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}##, where n is allowed to be any integer, except just those 0 through n - 1?
This doesn't make sense. There is no restriction on ##n## as it runs through all integers. The only question is, whether ##a^m=1## for some integer ##m## or not. If ##a^m=1## then ##m=0## will get us ##G=\{1\}~,## if ##m<0## then we can exchange ##a## by ##a^{-1}## (which is in the group and also a generator) and get an ##m > 0##, so that we may always assume ##m \in \mathbb{N}##. If there is no such number ##m##, then ##G## is a free Abelian group of rank ##1## which is isomorphic to ##\mathbb{Z}~##.
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
We define a cyclic group to be one all of whose elements can be written as "powers" of a single element, so G is cyclic if ##G= \{a^n ~|~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}## for some ##a \in G##. Is it true that in this case, ##G = \{ a^0, a^1, a^2, ... , a^{n-1} \}##? If so, why? And why do we write a cyclic group as ##\{a^n ~|~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}##, where n is allowed to be any integer, except just those 0 through n - 1?

We can only write it that way when G is finite.
 
Assume that G is a finite cyclic group. What I'm asking is whether writing ##G = \{a^n ~ | ~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}## is the same as writing ##\{a^0, a^1, ..., a^{n-1} \}##, and if so, why?
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
Assume that G is a finite cyclic group. What I'm asking is whether writing ##G = \{a^n ~ | ~ n \in \mathbb{Z} \}## is the same as writing ##\{a^0, a^1, ..., a^{n-1} \}##, and if so, why?

Yes: (I used o(g) to denote the order of the element g)

Proof:

If G is cyclic, we know there is an element ##g \in G## such that ##G = \{g^k|k \in \mathbb{Z}\}##. We also know that ##g^i = g^j \iff i \equiv j (mod \quad o(g))##.
Assume ##o(g) = m##. As ##G## is finite, ##m## is finite as well ##(m \in \mathbb{N}_0)##. Then, we see that ##G = \{e,g,g^2,g^3, ..., g^{m-1}\}##, because the other elements were duplicates of those elements (as we can reduce the exponents modulo m; for example: ##g^m = g^{2m}=g^{-m} = e, g^2 = g^{2-m} = g^{m+2}##). Every two elements that are still left are different (as they cannot be reduced mod m and give another element in the list).

I put the key part where you need that ##G## is finite in italics.

EDIT: Interesting to note:

Consider this theorem:

Let ##G## be finite of order ##n##. Then:

##G## cyclic ##\iff \exists g \in G: o(g) = n##
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top