If a is an element of R can you assume -a is an element of R?

  • Thread starter The_Iceflash
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Element
In summary, the conversation discusses whether or not it can be assumed that if a is an element of the set of real numbers, then -a is also an element of the set. It is concluded that this assumption is valid in a proof for abstract algebra. The conversation also touches on the properties and assumptions that can be made about real numbers in writing proofs.
  • #1
The_Iceflash
50
0

Homework Statement


Simply like the title says, "If a is an element of R can you assume -a is an element of R?"

R={All Real Numbers}

Homework Equations


N/A

The Attempt at a Solution


I concluded that if a is a real number so must -a. Can that be assumed in a proof? Should a simple "If a [tex]\epsilon[/tex] R, then -a [tex]\epsilon[/tex] R" be sufficient?

EDIT: It has to do with a proof on groups in Abstract Algebra.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I may be wrong, but if we are talking about Vector Spaces, And if we know that 'a' is in the vector space R, then any scalar multiplication keeps it in the same vector space.

if a is in R,
(-1)*a is also in R
 
  • #3
If this is an abstract algebra question, use the fact R is an ordered field, and R is closed under addition and multiplication.
 
  • #4
tt2348 said:
If this is an abstract algebra question, use the fact R is an ordered field, and R is closed under addition and multiplication.

Yes it is for Abstract Algebra. I apologize. I should have noted that.
 
  • #5
the existence of the identity guarantees the inverse of a.I mean what are the assumptions you are allowed to make?
I find it funny that things like " a+(-a)=0" , which are so intuitively obvious, are so conceptually difficult to prove without making assumptions.
 
  • #6
If this is for abstract algebra, then "R is a field (or ring)" is all that's needed. It's one of the axioms.
 
  • #7
Your question isn't so much about abstract algebra but rather what you can assume you know about the real numbers in writing down proofs. It does depend on the context. If a problem asks you to prove that (R,+) is an abelian group, for example, I don't think it's necessary to explicitly prove that x+y=y+x, but you can simply state that it is based on your previous knowledge of how the real numbers work. For your class, you need to assume certain properties about the real numbers, otherwise you're going to be spending all your time reconstructing the set of real numbers and deriving its properties, which isn't really the point of the course.
 

FAQ: If a is an element of R can you assume -a is an element of R?

Can you explain the concept of elements in R?

In mathematics, R refers to the set of real numbers. An element of R is any number that can be represented as a decimal, including integers, fractions, and irrational numbers.

What does it mean for a number to be an element of R?

To say that a number is an element of R means that it belongs to the set of real numbers. This means the number can be written as a decimal and has a specific place on the number line.

How is -a related to a in R?

In R, the negative of a number a is also an element of R. This means that if a is a real number, then -a is also a real number. We can think of -a as the "opposite" of a on the number line.

Can you assume -a is an element of R without any additional information?

Yes, if a is an element of R, then it is safe to assume that -a is also an element of R. This is because the set of real numbers is closed under the operation of taking the negative of a number.

What is the significance of knowing if -a is an element of R?

Knowing that -a is an element of R is important in many mathematical operations, such as addition and subtraction. It also helps us understand the relationship between positive and negative numbers in R.

Back
Top