Lagrange's Theorem: Injectivity.












4














Let $U$ be a subgroup of the finite group $G$ and $ain G$.



To show Lagrange's Theorem we defined a map $U rightarrow aU$, $umapsto au$ and said that it was bijective. Now for the injectivity we used the trivial case that for $au_1 = au_2Leftrightarrow u_1=u_2 $ but this uses that we add $a^{-1}$ from the left side in both cases.




Now my question is that of course there exists a $a^{-1}in G$ but don't we need to have $a^{-1}in aU$ to add it from the left? And if so, how can we show $a^{-1}in aU$?




Best,
KingDingeling






abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups







share|cite|improve this question
























  • What are the domain and the codomain of your function?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • Domain is $U$ and codomain is $aU$.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago










  • How can a function whose domain is $U$ be defined as $Umapsto aU$? And what is $a$ then?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • $a$ is an element of the Group $G$. It's a basic lefttranslation.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago












  • Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
    – Andres Mejia
    11 hours ago
















4














Let $U$ be a subgroup of the finite group $G$ and $ain G$.



To show Lagrange's Theorem we defined a map $U rightarrow aU$, $umapsto au$ and said that it was bijective. Now for the injectivity we used the trivial case that for $au_1 = au_2Leftrightarrow u_1=u_2 $ but this uses that we add $a^{-1}$ from the left side in both cases.




Now my question is that of course there exists a $a^{-1}in G$ but don't we need to have $a^{-1}in aU$ to add it from the left? And if so, how can we show $a^{-1}in aU$?




Best,
KingDingeling






abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups







share|cite|improve this question
























  • What are the domain and the codomain of your function?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • Domain is $U$ and codomain is $aU$.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago










  • How can a function whose domain is $U$ be defined as $Umapsto aU$? And what is $a$ then?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • $a$ is an element of the Group $G$. It's a basic lefttranslation.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago












  • Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
    – Andres Mejia
    11 hours ago














4












4








4







Let $U$ be a subgroup of the finite group $G$ and $ain G$.



To show Lagrange's Theorem we defined a map $U rightarrow aU$, $umapsto au$ and said that it was bijective. Now for the injectivity we used the trivial case that for $au_1 = au_2Leftrightarrow u_1=u_2 $ but this uses that we add $a^{-1}$ from the left side in both cases.




Now my question is that of course there exists a $a^{-1}in G$ but don't we need to have $a^{-1}in aU$ to add it from the left? And if so, how can we show $a^{-1}in aU$?




Best,
KingDingeling






abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups







share|cite|improve this question















Let $U$ be a subgroup of the finite group $G$ and $ain G$.



To show Lagrange's Theorem we defined a map $U rightarrow aU$, $umapsto au$ and said that it was bijective. Now for the injectivity we used the trivial case that for $au_1 = au_2Leftrightarrow u_1=u_2 $ but this uses that we add $a^{-1}$ from the left side in both cases.




Now my question is that of course there exists a $a^{-1}in G$ but don't we need to have $a^{-1}in aU$ to add it from the left? And if so, how can we show $a^{-1}in aU$?




Best,
KingDingeling






abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups




abstract-algebra group-theory finite-groups






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago









janmarqz

6,17241630




6,17241630










asked 12 hours ago









KingDingeling

435




435












  • What are the domain and the codomain of your function?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • Domain is $U$ and codomain is $aU$.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago










  • How can a function whose domain is $U$ be defined as $Umapsto aU$? And what is $a$ then?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • $a$ is an element of the Group $G$. It's a basic lefttranslation.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago












  • Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
    – Andres Mejia
    11 hours ago


















  • What are the domain and the codomain of your function?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • Domain is $U$ and codomain is $aU$.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago










  • How can a function whose domain is $U$ be defined as $Umapsto aU$? And what is $a$ then?
    – José Carlos Santos
    12 hours ago










  • $a$ is an element of the Group $G$. It's a basic lefttranslation.
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago












  • Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
    – Andres Mejia
    11 hours ago
















What are the domain and the codomain of your function?
– José Carlos Santos
12 hours ago




What are the domain and the codomain of your function?
– José Carlos Santos
12 hours ago












Domain is $U$ and codomain is $aU$.
– KingDingeling
12 hours ago




Domain is $U$ and codomain is $aU$.
– KingDingeling
12 hours ago












How can a function whose domain is $U$ be defined as $Umapsto aU$? And what is $a$ then?
– José Carlos Santos
12 hours ago




How can a function whose domain is $U$ be defined as $Umapsto aU$? And what is $a$ then?
– José Carlos Santos
12 hours ago












$a$ is an element of the Group $G$. It's a basic lefttranslation.
– KingDingeling
12 hours ago






$a$ is an element of the Group $G$. It's a basic lefttranslation.
– KingDingeling
12 hours ago














Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
– Andres Mejia
11 hours ago




Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
– Andres Mejia
11 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2














Okay so essentially what you're trying to show is that if $au_1=au_2$ then $u_1=u_2$, and you seem to think that we are restricted completely to working within $aU$ to do this. But this isn't the case at all, in fact since $u_1$ and $u_2$ may not be in $aU$ (they are not in the case that $anotin U$), so it doesn't even make sense that we could show $u_1=u_2$ while working entirely within the set $aU$.



The point is that these equalities we are worried about are occurring within $G$, so it is valid to use any element of $G$ to show this claim.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
    – KingDingeling
    10 hours ago



















3














You don’t need to have $a^{-1} in aU$ and won’t it by the way in mot cases.



This is by the way not required to prove the injectivity. The argument using $a^{-1}$ is not making that hypothesis.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • But if I take an element in $aU$ to prove the injecticity, may I just use $a^{-1}$ even if it isn't in $aU$?
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057946%2flagranges-theorem-injectivity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2














Okay so essentially what you're trying to show is that if $au_1=au_2$ then $u_1=u_2$, and you seem to think that we are restricted completely to working within $aU$ to do this. But this isn't the case at all, in fact since $u_1$ and $u_2$ may not be in $aU$ (they are not in the case that $anotin U$), so it doesn't even make sense that we could show $u_1=u_2$ while working entirely within the set $aU$.



The point is that these equalities we are worried about are occurring within $G$, so it is valid to use any element of $G$ to show this claim.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
    – KingDingeling
    10 hours ago
















2














Okay so essentially what you're trying to show is that if $au_1=au_2$ then $u_1=u_2$, and you seem to think that we are restricted completely to working within $aU$ to do this. But this isn't the case at all, in fact since $u_1$ and $u_2$ may not be in $aU$ (they are not in the case that $anotin U$), so it doesn't even make sense that we could show $u_1=u_2$ while working entirely within the set $aU$.



The point is that these equalities we are worried about are occurring within $G$, so it is valid to use any element of $G$ to show this claim.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
    – KingDingeling
    10 hours ago














2












2








2






Okay so essentially what you're trying to show is that if $au_1=au_2$ then $u_1=u_2$, and you seem to think that we are restricted completely to working within $aU$ to do this. But this isn't the case at all, in fact since $u_1$ and $u_2$ may not be in $aU$ (they are not in the case that $anotin U$), so it doesn't even make sense that we could show $u_1=u_2$ while working entirely within the set $aU$.



The point is that these equalities we are worried about are occurring within $G$, so it is valid to use any element of $G$ to show this claim.






share|cite|improve this answer












Okay so essentially what you're trying to show is that if $au_1=au_2$ then $u_1=u_2$, and you seem to think that we are restricted completely to working within $aU$ to do this. But this isn't the case at all, in fact since $u_1$ and $u_2$ may not be in $aU$ (they are not in the case that $anotin U$), so it doesn't even make sense that we could show $u_1=u_2$ while working entirely within the set $aU$.



The point is that these equalities we are worried about are occurring within $G$, so it is valid to use any element of $G$ to show this claim.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 10 hours ago









Alex Mathers

10.8k21344




10.8k21344












  • Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
    – KingDingeling
    10 hours ago


















  • Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
    – KingDingeling
    10 hours ago
















Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
– KingDingeling
10 hours ago




Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
– KingDingeling
10 hours ago











3














You don’t need to have $a^{-1} in aU$ and won’t it by the way in mot cases.



This is by the way not required to prove the injectivity. The argument using $a^{-1}$ is not making that hypothesis.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • But if I take an element in $aU$ to prove the injecticity, may I just use $a^{-1}$ even if it isn't in $aU$?
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago


















3














You don’t need to have $a^{-1} in aU$ and won’t it by the way in mot cases.



This is by the way not required to prove the injectivity. The argument using $a^{-1}$ is not making that hypothesis.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • But if I take an element in $aU$ to prove the injecticity, may I just use $a^{-1}$ even if it isn't in $aU$?
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago
















3












3








3






You don’t need to have $a^{-1} in aU$ and won’t it by the way in mot cases.



This is by the way not required to prove the injectivity. The argument using $a^{-1}$ is not making that hypothesis.






share|cite|improve this answer












You don’t need to have $a^{-1} in aU$ and won’t it by the way in mot cases.



This is by the way not required to prove the injectivity. The argument using $a^{-1}$ is not making that hypothesis.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 12 hours ago









mathcounterexamples.net

24.4k21753




24.4k21753












  • But if I take an element in $aU$ to prove the injecticity, may I just use $a^{-1}$ even if it isn't in $aU$?
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago




















  • But if I take an element in $aU$ to prove the injecticity, may I just use $a^{-1}$ even if it isn't in $aU$?
    – KingDingeling
    12 hours ago


















But if I take an element in $aU$ to prove the injecticity, may I just use $a^{-1}$ even if it isn't in $aU$?
– KingDingeling
12 hours ago






But if I take an element in $aU$ to prove the injecticity, may I just use $a^{-1}$ even if it isn't in $aU$?
– KingDingeling
12 hours ago




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057946%2flagranges-theorem-injectivity%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Ellipse (mathématiques)

Image
Pour les articles homonymes, voir Ellipse. L'ellipse est le lieu des points dont la somme des distances à deux points fixes, dits foyers, est constante. Section du cône ou projection du cercle. En géométrie, une ellipse est une courbe plane fermée obtenue par l’intersection d’un cône de révolution avec un plan, à condition que celui-ci coupe l'axe de rotation du cône ou du cylindre : c'est une conique d'excentricité strictement comprise entre 0 et 1. On peut également la définir comme le lieu des points dont la somme des distances à deux points fixes, dits foyers, est constante (sa construction par la méthode du jardinier est très simple). Dans la vie courante, l’ellipse est la forme qu'on perçoit en regardant un cercle en perspective, ou la figure formée par l’ombre d'un disque sur une surface plane. On retrouve aussi, en première approximation [ 1 ] , des ellipses dans les trajectoires des corps célestes (planètes, comètes ou satellites arti...
Read more

Quarter-circle Tiles

Image
up vote 0 down vote favorite I have $99$ identical square tiles, each with a quarter-circle drawn on it like this: [asy] size(1.5cm); draw(Arc((2,0),1,90,180),red+1); draw((0,0)--(2,0)--(2,2)--(0,2)--(0,0)); [/asy] When I arrange the tiles in a $9times 11$ rectangular grid, each with a random orientation, what is the expected value of the number of full circles I form? I think this problem has to do with finding the chance any given 2x2 square has a circle, but I can't find it. expected-value share | cite | improve this question asked Nov 20 at 15:03 6minecraftninja 1 2 ...
Read more

Mont Emei

Image
Mont Emei.mw-parser-output .entete.map{background-image:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Picto_infobox_map.png")} Vue du sommet Wanfo du mont Emei Géographie Altitude 3 099  m , Wanfo Coordonnées 29° 31′ 11″ nord, 103° 19′ 57″ est Administration Pays   Chine Province Sichuan Ville-préfecture Leshan Géolocalisation sur la carte : Sichuan Mont Emei Géolocalisation sur la carte : Chine Mont Emei modifier   Paysage panoramique du mont Emei, incluant le paysage panoramique du grand Bouddha de Leshan *   Patrimoine mondial de l'UNESCO Passerelle en bois sur le versant ouest Pays   Chine Subdivision Sichuan Type Mixte Critères (iv) (vi) (x) Superficie 15 400 ha Numéro d’identification 779 Zone géographique Asie et Pacifique  ** Année d’inscription 1996 (20 e session) * Descriptif officiel UNESCO ** Classification géog...
Read more