Why are the integers and rationals not isomorphic under addition?

  • Thread starter Thread starter icantadd
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the integers under addition are not isomorphic to the rationals under addition. Participants are exploring the properties of these two groups and the implications of cyclicity in group theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are examining the concept of cyclic groups and questioning whether the rationals can be generated by a single element. They discuss the implications of density in the rationals and attempt to derive contradictions based on the assumption that the rationals are cyclic.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing with various attempts to derive contradictions from the assumption that the rationals are cyclic. Some participants are providing alternative rational numbers to challenge the original assumptions, while others are reflecting on their previous reasoning.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework problem, which may limit the information they can use or the methods they can apply. There is an emphasis on exploring the properties of the groups involved without reaching a definitive conclusion.

icantadd
Messages
109
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that the integers (under addition) are not isomorphic to the rationals (under addition).

Homework Equations



Two groups are isomorphic if there is an isomorphism between them.

If there is an isomorphism from G to H, f : G --> H, then G is cyclic iff H is cyclic.

A group G is cyclic if [tex]\{ x^n | n \in \mathbb{Z} \} = G, for some x \in G[/tex] .


The Attempt at a Solution



The integers are generated by [tex]<1>[/tex]. We can show that Z and Q are not isomorphic if we show that the rationals cannot be generated. Thus assume they are. Then there is an a such that

[tex]<a> = Q [\tex].<br /> [tex]0a = 0, 1a = \frac{l}{m} , 2a = \fract{2l}{m}[\tex].<br /> <br /> Because the rationals are dense there is a [tex]b \in Q s.t. \frac{l}{m} < b < \frac{2l}{m} [\tex]<br /> <br /> We must show that [tex]b = ka = \frac{kl}{m}, thus \frac{l}{m} < \frac{kl}{m} < \frac{2l}{m} [\tex]. <br /> <br /> Now I don't know what to do. The above is not a contradiction. Any ideas?[/tex][/tex][/tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose Q is cyclic.

Let p/q be a generator.

Can you find a rational number which is not an integer multiple of p/q?
Think of a rational involving p and q somehow.
 
samkolb said:
Suppose Q is cyclic.

Let p/q be a generator.

Can you find a rational number which is not an integer multiple of p/q?
Think of a rational involving p and q somehow.

sure, continuing

Observe p/2q

Then,

p/2q = p/q where p,q are not equal to zero. (if p is zero then the set is finite).

From the above conclude that
pq=2pq, therefore 1=2.
done.
 
No, no. <p/q> is the set of number k*p/q where k is an integer. Set kp/q=p/(2q) and derive a different contradiction.
 
Dick said:
No, no. <p/q> is the set of number k*p/q where k is an integer. Set kp/q=p/(2q) and derive a different contradiction.

Thanks! Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking there. I went and got some food, came back and hit myself in the head on that one.
 

Similar threads

Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K