Z_4 Homework Statement: Confirm My Book is Wrong

  • Thread starter Thread starter ehrenfest
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Presentation
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the presentation of the group Z_4, specifically examining the relations given in the form (a,b : a^4=1, b=a^2). Participants are debating whether this presentation correctly represents Z_4, with some expressing disagreement with a textbook claim.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants argue that the relation b=a^2 makes b redundant as a generator, suggesting that the group can be generated solely by a. Others question the implications of this relation and seek clarification on the definition of group presentations and their isomorphisms.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants exploring different interpretations of the group presentation. Some have provided insights into the structure of the group and the nature of the relations, while others are seeking further clarification on specific aspects of group presentations and their implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and properties of group presentations, including the nature of normal subgroups and the relationships between generators and relations. There is an ongoing exploration of how to identify elements within the normal subgroup R and its implications for the group structure.

ehrenfest
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


My book says that [itex](a,b:a^4=1,b=a^2)[/itex] is a presentation of Z_4. I strongly disagree. If they want to get a presentation of Z_4, they need to get b as a consequence of their relations, but I only see that b^2 is a consequence of their relations. Please confirm that my book is wrong.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sorry, but I agree with the book. The relation b=a^2 means that b is redundant as a generator, ie, given anything generated by a and b, use this relation to write it in terms of a alone, so that it is generated by a alone. Thus we have:

[tex]<a,b|a^4=1, b=a^2> \cong <a|a^4=1> \cong \mathbb{Z}_4[/tex]

You can prove this (or, without much more effort, the obvious generalization to more generators) by resorting to the definition of:

[tex]<a_1,...,a_n | r_1,...,r_m>[/tex]

as the quotient of the free group F generated by [itex]a_1,...,a_n[/itex] by the normal subgroup generated by [itex]\{r_1,...,r_m\}[/itex] (specifically, we write the relations in the form [itex]r_i=1[/itex], where [itex]r_i[/itex] is a word formed out of the [itex]a_i[/itex], ie, an element of F).
 
StatusX said:
Sorry, but I agree with the book. The relation b=a^2 means that b is redundant as a generator, ie, given anything generated by a and b, use this relation to write it in terms of a alone, so that it is generated by a alone. Thus we have:

[tex]<a,b|a^4=1, b=a^2> \cong <a|a^4=1>[/tex]

I am not sure why that equation is true. I thought that the only way this group would be isomorphic to Z_4 would be if b were in the normal closure of a since it is clear that

[tex]<a,b|a^4=1, b=1> \cong <a|a^4=1> \cong \mathbb{Z}_4[/tex]

Can explain that equation in terms of the definition of a group presentation? I am just learning what that is, so I haven't gotten far from the definition. So this group is the F[{a,b}] modded out by the normal closure N of the words {a^4,ba^{-2}}. What you wrote probably makes a lot of sense but group presentations are just really confusing me!
 
A presentation is just a list of generators and relations they satisfy. In this case the generators are a and b, and the relations are a^4=1 and a^2=b. An arbitrary element of the group with this presentation looks like a^n b^m, where n and m are integers. b=a^2 implies that we can write this element as a^n a^(2m) = a^(n+2m). What does a^4=1 imply?
 
I am not sure this is the same, but I am currently studying group representations. they are homomorphisms from a group into a linear space. Not isomorphisms like you suggested. Does this make the difference?
 
A representation is not the same thing as a presentation.
 
Let A be a set and let [itex]\{r_i\} \subset F[A][/itex]. Let R be the least normal subgroup of F[A] containing the [itex]r_i[/itex]. An isomorphism [itex]\phi[/itex] of F[A]/R onto a group G is a presentation of G.

So, in our case [itex]\{r_i\} = \{b^4, ba^{-2}\}[/itex]. If R is the least normal subgroup of F[A] that contains those elements, then can you please explain how you know that [itex]F[A]/R[/itex] is isomorphic to [itex]Z_4[/itex]?

I guess those relations tells us that [itex]bR=a^2R[/itex] which implies that you can write any element of the quotient group F[A]/R only in terms of aR. So the elements of F[A]/R are all included in the set [itex]\{a^mR : m \in \mathbb{Z}\}[/itex]. And the algebra of that set is just addition of exponents because that is how multiplication is defined in the free group. And we also know that a^4R=R, so we are modding out Z by 4. I think I see now. What bothers me is that I cannot figure out what R is exactly. I want to write it down so that I know what the cosets of F[A]/R are. Is that possible?
 
Last edited:
ehrenfest said:
What bothers me is that I cannot figure out what R is exactly.
That depends, of course, on what "figure out exactly" means to you.

You already have a description of R as the kernel of a homomorphism [itex]F[\{a,b\}] \to \mathbb{Z}_4[/itex], and you can do a lot with that information.
 
Hurkyl said:
That depends, of course, on what "figure out exactly" means to you.

By "figure out exactly," I guess that if I give you an element of F[A], I want to know whether it is in R.
 
  • #10
ehrenfest said:
So, in our case [itex]\{r_i\} = \{b^4, ba^{-2}\}[/itex]. If R is the least normal subgroup of F[A] that contains those elements, then can you please explain how you know that [itex]F[A]/R[/itex] is isomorphic to [itex]Z_4[/itex]?

I guess those relations tells us that [itex]bR=a^2R[/itex] which implies that you can write any element of the quotient group F[A]/R only in terms of aR. So the elements of F[A]/R are all included in the set [itex]\{a^mR : m \in \mathbb{Z}\}[/itex]. And the algebra of that set is just addition of exponents because that is how multiplication is defined in the free group. And we also know that a^4R=R, so we are modding out Z by 4. I think I see now.

You're pretty much right. More rigorously, you want to form an isomorphism between [itex]F_2/<\{a^4,ab^{-2}\}>[/itex] and [itex]F_1/<\{a^4\}>[/itex]. This is acheived by sending [a] to [a] (the first is an equivalence class in F2 and the second is an equivalence class in F1) and to [a2], which defines the map completely since these are generators. You've basically shown this is surjective, but you should really also show it's well-defined and injective, which shouldn't be too hard.

What bothers me is that I cannot figure out what R is exactly. I want to write it down so that I know what the cosets of F[A]/R are. Is that possible?

R is an ugly group, just like F[A]. It basically consists of all fancy ways of writing out the identity in the group being presented (eg, [itex](ab)^{50} a^4 a^2 b^{-1} a^4 (ab)^{-50} a^{-2}b[/itex], etc).
 

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K