What is the identity element in the group {2,4,6,8} under multiplication mod 10?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter LCSphysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group Integers
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the identity element in the group {2,4,6,8} under multiplication mod 10. Participants explore concepts related to group theory, modular arithmetic, and the properties of identity elements within different group structures.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the concept of "a modulo n" and seek clarification on its implications for group theory.
  • There is a discussion about the notation used in group operations, with some arguing that additive groups should not be represented as multiplicative groups, as it complicates understanding.
  • One participant suggests that the identity element in the group {2,4,6,8} under multiplication mod 10 is 6, emphasizing the importance of recognizing identities by their properties rather than their appearances.
  • Another participant challenges the idea of relabeling elements to simplify understanding, arguing that it may lead to a superficial grasp of the concepts without deeper comprehension.
  • Some participants discuss the equivalence classes in modular arithmetic and how they relate to group operations, with differing views on the clarity of using different notations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to understanding the identity element or the clarity of relabeling elements. Multiple competing views remain regarding the notation and conceptual understanding of groups.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations in understanding due to the complexity of notation and the potential for confusion between additive and multiplicative groups. There are unresolved questions about the implications of these notations on the understanding of group properties.

LCSphysicist
Messages
644
Reaction score
163
TL;DR
I am having trouble to understand the mechanism behind the group integer modulo 4.
1607453832232.png

Maybe my problem is misunderstand the concept of " a modulo n ". I would appreciate any help to get this concept and understand the grou´p
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Herculi said:
Summary:: I am having trouble to understand the mechanism behind the group integer modulo 4.

View attachment 273930
Maybe my problem is misunderstand the concept of " a modulo n ". I would appreciate any help to get this concept and understand the grou´p
Modulo ##n## means to consider the remainders by a division of an integer by ##n##. In your case, you have the remainders ##0,1,2,3##. But ##5## is also a possible remainder: ##5=0\cdot 4+ 5## or ##1= (-1)\cdot 4+5##. And so are the others. Try to define the equivalence relation: When are two integers ##n## and ##m## in the same equivalence class?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: LCSphysicist
Something else that might be confusing is when they write "ac = e". Since the group operation is addition, ac means a + c, or 1 + 3 = 0 modulo 4.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FactChecker, Vanadium 50 and fresh_42
Mark44 said:
Something else that might be confusing is when they write "ac = e#. Since the group operation is addition, ac means a + c, or 1 + 3 = 0 modulo 4.
Oops, I missed that. It is not only confusing, it is plain wrong, because we also have a multiplication on the classes without ##e##. Additive groups shouldn't be written as multiplicative groups. It complicates the concept of a ring later on.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and member 587159
fresh_42 said:
Oops, I missed that. It is not only confusing, it is plain wrong, because we also have a multiplication on the classes without ##e##. Additive groups shouldn't be written as multiplicative groups. It complicates the concept of a ring later on.
It certainly would have been clearer to use the symbol '+' for this additive group, instead of juxtaposing a and b. IOW, it would have been better to write "a + b = e".
 
I learned the convention that groups are written by multiplication if they are arbitrary groups and groups are all which are considered. If they are written by addition, then the convention said that those are abelian groups - another reason to use addition here. However, especially the ##\mathbb{Z}_n## are the standard examples of rings, hence we need both at the same time on the equivalence classes above. Maybe it is old fashioned to insist on such conventions, but they make life a lot easier. E.g. I do not like if matrices are written as ##A=(a_{ji})## instead of ##A=(a_{ij})##. And yes, ##\varepsilon## can certainly be negative, but why?
 
Herculi said:
Summary:: I am having trouble to understand the mechanism behind the group integer modulo 4.

The concept of "addition modulo 4" can be taught without talking about groups. To introduce it in an elementary school class, we ask students to pretend that the only allowed integers are 0,1,2,3. When an addition is performed such as 3 + 2 , we require that result in ordinary arithmetic be replaced by dividing the sum by 4 and using the integer remainder from that division as the answer. So, in modulo 4 arithmetic 3+2 = 1 since, in ordinary arithmetic 3 + 2 = 5 = 2(4) + 1.

For calculations like 1 - 3, we observe that in ordinary arithmetic
1 - 3 = -2 and -2 = (-1)(4) + 2, so in modulo 4 arithmetic 1 - 3 = 2.

The algorithm requires that when we express an integer ##z## in the form ##z = k(4) + r## that we must do this in a way that makes the remainder ##r## non-negative. Sometimes this requires that we choose ##k## to be a negative number.

When we study group theory, we can take a more abstract approach. One way to define "the additive group of integers modulo 4" is to let each element of the group be an infinite set of integers.

For example, in the text you quoted, ##a## is the set of all integers whose division by 4 gives a remainder of 1. For example:

1 = 0(4) + 1

5 = 2(4) + 1

-3 = -1(4) + 1

9 = 2(4) + 1

##a = \{1,5,-3,9,...\}##

The text you quoted conveniently lists the number 1 as the initial element in the set ##a##. You can interpret the contents of ##e,c,d## in a similar manner.

To define the operation ##\circ## of the group, we define addition of the elements ##a \circ b## to be the addition of the sets they represent, in the sense that we form a new set consisting of all possible sums of numbers created by adding one element from ##a## to one element of ##b##.

For example:

##a \circ b = \{1,5,-3,9,...\} \circ \{2,6,-2,10,..\}##

## = \{ 1+2,1+6,1-2,1+10,...,5+2,5+6,5-2,5+10,...\}##

## = \{3,7,-1,11,..,7,11,3,15,...\} = c ##

The calculation give ##a\circ b = c##. To understand that the final result is ##c## you have to imagine doing an infinite number of additions, and you have to keep in mind that in set notation, we do not list the same element twice. So the set I denoted by "##\{3,7,1,11,...,7,11,3,15,...\}##" should actually be denoted using only a single "3" , a single "7", and a single "11",

An more advanced way to define the additive group of integers modulo 4 is to use the group theory concept of a "quotient group". I don't know if you've studied that concept yet.
 
Stephen Tashi said:
An more advanced way to define the additive group of integers modulo 4 is to use the group theory concept of a "quotient group". I don't know if you've studied that concept yet.
That is not "more advanced", it is only a different notation! The equivalence classes are precisely the elements of the quotient, and the entire "quotient building" is nothing else as introducing an equivalence relation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pbuk
Relabel e,a,b,c to [0],[1],[2],[3] respectively. It should make things easier to understand. Note that in the group [0] = [4] = [8] and similarly [1] = [-3] = [5] = [9] and so on.
 
  • #10
I am not sure relabeling makes things easier to understand. I think it makes it easier for people to get the right answer for a tiny subset of problems without understanding.

Consider the group {2,4,6,8} under the operation multiplication mod 10. The identity is 6. This throws people for loops, but an important thing about studying groups is recognizing an identity by its properties, not by what it "looks like."

Sure, I can "relabel" {2,4,6,8} as {1,2,0,3} under addition mod 4, so now the identity looks like one, but I think this does the student a disservice by not letting them discover that these two groups have the same Cayley table and that there are only two possibilities that are groups: C4 and V4.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pbuk and fresh_42

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K