Anyone up to double check an isomorphism proof?

In summary: I will not include them here.In summary, the two problems state that a given binary structure is isomorphic to a real number space, and that given a complex number, there is a matrix which describes it. The first problem states that there is a bijection between the two, while the second problem states that the given matrix is surjective and injective.
  • #1
Syrus
214
0

Homework Statement




*Attached is the problem statement, along with a definition which is to be used (I feel like some of the definitions in this text are somewhat untraditional, so I am including this one for clarity).

Edit* sorry, it's problem #31.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution




Let <T, !> be any binary structure isomorphic with <S,*>. This means there is some bijection Ψ: S → T such that (∀s1,s2 ∈ S)(Ψ(s1*s2) = Ψ(s1)!Ψ(s2)). Now let d ∈ T. Since Ψ is surjective, there is some c ∈ S such that Ψ(c) = d. But then there is some x ∈ S such that x*x = c. As a result, Ψ(x*x) = Ψ(c) = d = Ψ(x)!Ψ(x).

Q.E.D.
 

Attachments

  • def.jpg
    def.jpg
    33.8 KB · Views: 356
  • prob 1.jpg
    prob 1.jpg
    16.8 KB · Views: 357
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This is ok, Syrus!
 
  • #3
Thank you, micromass =)
 
  • #4
I was recently assigned more problems similar to that above. I figured I may as well post these as well since they correlate with the original post and I have time until they are due.


The proofs for exercises 32 and 33 are below. The original questions and other related materials are attached as thumbnails.


32: Let <T, !> be any binary structure isomorphic with <S,*>. This means there is some bijection Ψ: S → T such that (∀s1,s2 ∈ S)(Ψ(s1*s2) = Ψ(s1)!Ψ(s2)). Take b to be the identity element of S under *. Clearly, then, b*b = b. As a result, Ψ(b*b) = Ψ(b)!Ψ(b). By lemma 3.14 (attached above), however, Ψ(b) is the identity element of T under !. Hence, Ψ(b)!Ψ(b) = Ψ(b).

Q.E.D.

*from here on, C denotes the set of complex numbers, and R the set of reals.. the funky brackets are my best attempt at 2 X 2 matrices (i.e. in [a b] [a b] the a's should be in a line vertically).


33a: Let Ψ: C → H defined as follows: for any complex number, say x, of the form a + bi, where a,b ∈ R and i2 = -1, Ψ(x) = [a -b]
[b a].
Let j ∈ H. So j is a matrix of the form above ^, for some a,b ∈ R. But then we have k = a +bi ∈ C, and so Ψ(k) = [a -b]
[b a]. Thus, Ψ is surjective.
Now let m,n ∈ C. Then m = c +di and n = f + gi for some c,d,f,g ∈ R. Now suppose Ψ(m) = Ψ(n). Then equating matrices shows that c = f and d = g, and so m = c +di = f + gi = n. Hence, Ψ is injective.
Lastly, let j,k ∈ C. Then j = a + bi for some real nubmers a and b. Also, k = c + di for some real numbers c and d. Thus, Ψ(j + k) = Ψ((a + bi) + (c + di)) = Ψ((a + c) + (b+d)i) = Ψ(j) + Ψ(k). Thus, Ψ satisfies the homomorphism property.

33b: The proofs for injectivity and surjectivity are identical to those in part a. The proof of the homomorphism property is as follows: Let Ψ be defined as above. Let x,y ∈ C. Then x = j + ki and y = m + ni for some j,k,n,m in R. Thus, Ψ(x*y) = Ψ((j + ki) * (m +ni)) = Ψ(jm + jni + kmi - kn) = Ψ((jm - kn) + (jn + km)i) = Ψ(j) * Ψ(k).

Q.E.D.
 

Attachments

  • lemma1.jpeg
    lemma1.jpeg
    37 KB · Views: 449
  • problems1.jpeg
    problems1.jpeg
    38.2 KB · Views: 392
  • #5
Syrus said:
I was recently assigned more problems similar to that above. I figured I may as well post these as well since they correlate with the original post and I have time until they are due.


The proofs for exercises 32 and 33 are below. The original questions and other related materials are attached as thumbnails.


32: Let <T, !> be any binary structure isomorphic with <S,*>. This means there is some bijection Ψ: S → T such that (∀s1,s2 ∈ S)(Ψ(s1*s2) = Ψ(s1)!Ψ(s2)). Take b to be the identity element of S under *. Clearly, then, b*b = b. As a result, Ψ(b*b) = Ψ(b)!Ψ(b).

Shouldn't that be: as a result [itex]\psi(b)=\psi(b*b)=\psi(b) ! \psi(b)[/itex]. And doesn't the proof end here??

By lemma 3.14 (attached above), however, Ψ(b) is the identity element of T under !. Hence, Ψ(b)!Ψ(b) = Ψ(b).

I don't see what you're doing here. And I don't see why you use lemma 3.14. Nobody said that (S,*) has an identity. So lemma 3.14 isn't even applicable!

33a: Let Ψ: C → H defined as follows: for any complex number, say x, of the form a + bi, where a,b ∈ R and i2 = -1, Ψ(x) = [a -b]
[b a].
Let j ∈ H. So j is a matrix of the form above ^, for some a,b ∈ R. But then we have k = a +bi ∈ C, and so Ψ(k) = [a -b]
[b a]. Thus, Ψ is surjective.
Now let m,n ∈ C. Then m = c +di and n = f + gi for some c,d,f,g ∈ R. Now suppose Ψ(m) = Ψ(n). Then equating matrices shows that c = f and d = g, and so m = c +di = f + gi = n. Hence, Ψ is injective.
Lastly, let j,k ∈ C. Then j = a + bi for some real nubmers a and b. Also, k = c + di for some real numbers c and d. Thus, Ψ(j + k) = Ψ((a + bi) + (c + di)) = Ψ((a + c) + (b+d)i) = Ψ(j) + Ψ(k). Thus, Ψ satisfies the homomorphism property.

33b: The proofs for injectivity and surjectivity are identical to those in part a. The proof of the homomorphism property is as follows: Let Ψ be defined as above. Let x,y ∈ C. Then x = j + ki and y = m + ni for some j,k,n,m in R. Thus, Ψ(x*y) = Ψ((j + ki) * (m +ni)) = Ψ(jm + jni + kmi - kn) = Ψ((jm - kn) + (jn + km)i) = Ψ(j) * Ψ(k). Q.E.D.

This looks quite ok!
 
  • #6
Yes, youre correct micromass. It was my slip up, I can use the equivalence between (b*b) and b, along with the definition of isomorphism to show that psi(b) = psi(b)!psi(b).

Thanks again for your time.

Cyrus
 

Related to Anyone up to double check an isomorphism proof?

1. What is an isomorphism proof?

An isomorphism proof is a mathematical technique used to show that two mathematical structures, such as graphs or groups, are essentially the same. It involves demonstrating a one-to-one correspondence between the elements of the two structures that preserves the structure and properties of the elements.

2. Why is it important to double check an isomorphism proof?

Double checking an isomorphism proof is important because mathematical proofs can be complex and mistakes can easily occur. By having someone else review the proof, any errors or oversights can be caught and corrected, ensuring the validity of the proof.

3. How do you go about double checking an isomorphism proof?

To double check an isomorphism proof, you should carefully examine each step of the proof and make sure that the logical reasoning is sound. You can also try to come up with counterexamples or alternative approaches to the proof to see if it still holds.

4. What are some common mistakes in isomorphism proofs?

Some common mistakes in isomorphism proofs include assuming that a one-to-one correspondence exists without explicitly demonstrating it, making incorrect assumptions about the properties of the two structures being compared, and making logical leaps without proper justification.

5. Can an isomorphism proof be incorrect even if it is double checked?

Yes, an isomorphism proof can still be incorrect even if it is double checked. Double checking can help catch most mistakes, but it is still possible for errors to slip through. Additionally, there may be underlying assumptions or properties that are not explicitly stated in the proof that could be incorrect. It is always important to carefully review and verify any mathematical proof.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
871
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
514
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top