MHB Understanding Finite Quotient Groups: G/H with G=Z6 and H=(0,3)

Click For Summary
In the discussion on finite quotient groups, G is defined as Z6 and H as the normal subgroup (0,3). The elements of the quotient group G/H are derived from the cosets formed by adding elements of H to each element of G. It is established that H+3 is equivalent to H+0 because in Z6, adding 3 to the elements of H results in the same set {0,3}. The distinct cosets identified are H, H+1, and H+2, leading to the conclusion that G/H contains only three unique cosets despite having multiple representations. This illustrates the concept that a group can be expressed as a union of distinct cosets of its subgroup.
onie mti
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
G is a group and H is a normal subgroup of G.
where G=Z6 and H=(0,3)
i was told to list the elements of G/H
I had:
H= H+0={0,3}
H+1={14}
H+2={2,5}
now they are saying H+3 is the same as H+0, how so?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
onie mti said:
G is a group and H is a normal subgroup of G.
where G=Z6 and H=(0,3)
i was told to list the elements of G/H
I had:
H= H+0={0,3}
H+1={14}
H+2={2,5}
now they are saying H+3 is the same as H+0, how so?

Yes. That is the idea of a quotient group.
The difference between 0 and 3 is "divided" out.
They are considered equivalent.

Alternatively, since G has 6 elements and we divide by a H with 2 elements, that means that G/H has 6/2=3 elements.
 
Let's just do the math:

What is $H+3$?

Well, $H+3 = \{g \in G: g = h+3, h \in H\}$

So we add 3 to every element of $H = \{0,3\}$.

Thus $H+3 = \{0+3,3+3\}$.

However, in $\Bbb Z_6$, we have $3+3 = 0$, because 6 is a multiple of 6.

Thus, $H+3 = \{3,0\} = \{0,3\} = H$ (since in sets, the order in which we list the elements doesn't matter).

Similarly, $H+4 = \{0+4,3+4\} = \{4,1\} = \{1,4\} = \{0+1,3+1\} = H+1$.

I think you can convince yourself that $H+5 = H+2$.

Thus, out of the 6 possible "conceivable" cosets we have, it turns out that:

$H = H+3$
$H+1 = H+4$
$H+2 = H+5$

so there are only 3 DISTINCT cosets, although each one of the 3 has "two different names".

This is something to be wary of with cosets: a coset $Hg$ can have many different $g$ that identify the same coset. So even if $g \neq g'$, it still might be that $Hg = Hg'$.

IN GENERAL, if $Ha = \{a,h_1a,\dots,h_na\}$, we have $n+1$ different "names" for the same coset:

$Ha = Ha_k$ where $a_k = h_ka$.

Another interesting fact (which turns out always to be true):

$\Bbb Z_6 = \{0,1,2,3,4,5\} = \{0,3\} \cup \{1,4\} \cup \{2,5\} = H \cup (H+1) \cup (H+2)$,

any group $G$ is a union of the distinct cosets of any subgroup $H$.

In plane geometry, a coset of a line $L$ through the origin, is a coset $(x_0,y_0) + L$, which is a line parallel to $L$ that goes through the point $(x_0,y_0)$. This new line (the coset) is often called "the translation of $L$ by $(x_0,y_0)$" which represents "how much we shift $L$".

By analogy, cosets $Hg$ are often (especially in the ABELIAN case) called (in this case right) translations of $H$ by $g$. In other words, we can think of $H+k$ as "shifting $H$ by $k$ units", and doing this, it is clear for $\Bbb Z_6$ and $H = \{0,3\}$ we only have 3 possible shifts:

The null shift (shift by 0)
Shift by 1 (or 4, or 7, or...)
Shift by 2 (or 5, or 8, or...)

before the cycle repeats itself. That's why $\Bbb Z_6$ is called "cyclic", and is best visualized as the 6 vertices of a regular polygon (this can be done explicitly if one takes:

$[k] \iff \cos(2\pi k/6) + i\sin(2\pi k/6)$

in the complex numbers, and uses complex multiplication, instead of addition mod 6. The above is an example of an ISOMORPHISM, something you will soon be reading very much about).
 
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 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
840
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
815
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
491
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K