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
    3 hours ago










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










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










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












  • Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
    – Andres Mejia
    3 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
    3 hours ago










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










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










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












  • Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
    – Andres Mejia
    3 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 2 hours ago









janmarqz

6,17241630




6,17241630










asked 4 hours ago









KingDingeling

435




435












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










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










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










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












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


















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










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










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










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












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
















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




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












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




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












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




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












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






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














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




Let U be trivial. Is $a^{-1}$ in $aU$?
– Andres Mejia
3 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
    2 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
    3 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
    2 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
    2 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 2 hours ago









Alex Mathers

10.8k21344




10.8k21344












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


















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
















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




Thank you for taking time and explaining :)
– KingDingeling
2 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
    3 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
    3 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 4 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
    3 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
    3 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
3 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
3 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

Morgemoulin

Image
Morgemoulin — miejscowość i gmina — Państwo   Francja Region Grand Est Departament Moza Okręg Verdun Kod INSEE 55357 Powierzchnia 6,82 km² Populacja  (1990) • liczba ludności 75 • gęstość 11 os./km² Kod pocztowy 55400 Położenie na mapie Francji Morgemoulin 49°14′N   5°35′E / 49,233333   5,583333 Portal Francja Morgemoulin – miejscowość i gmina we Francji, w regionie Grand Est, w departamencie Moza. Według danych na rok 1990 gminę zamieszkiwało 75 osób, a gęstość zaludnienia wynosiła 11 osób/km² (wśród 2335 gmin Lotaryngii Morgemoulin plasuje się na 970. miejscu pod względem liczby ludności, natomiast pod względem powierzchni na miejscu 848.). Bibliografia | Francuski urząd statystyczny ( fr. ) . p   •   d   •   e Gminy okręgu Verdun Abaucourt-Hautecourt • Aincreville • Ambly-sur-Meuse • Amel-sur-l'Étang • Ancemont • Arrancy-sur-Crusne • Aubréville • Autré
Read more

Scott Moir

Image
Scott Moir Tessa Virtue i Scott Moir w 2016 r. Reprezentacja   Kanada Data i miejsce urodzenia 2 września 1987 London Wzrost 180 cm Konkurencja Pary taneczne Partner sportowy Tessa Virtue Trener Marie-France Dubreuil, Patrice Lauzon, Romain Haguenauer Poprzednio: Marina Zujewa, Oleg Epstein, Igor Szpilband, Johnny Johns, Carol Moir, Paul MacIntosh, Suzanne Killing Klub Montreal International School of Skating Poprzednio: Arctic Edge FSC Ilderton Skating Club Lokalizacja treningowa Montreal Poprzednio: Canton Kitchener Rekordy życiowe ISU przed sezonem 2018/2019 Nota łączna 206,07 Igrzyska Olimpijskie 2018 Taniec krótki 83,67 Igrzyska Olimpijskie 2018 Taniec dowolny 122,40 Igrzyska Olimpijskie 2018 Dorobek medalowy Reprezentacja   Kanada Igrzyska olimpijskie Złoto Vancouver 2010 pary taneczne Złoto Pjongczang 2018 pary taneczne Złoto Pjongczang 2018 drużynowo Srebro S
Read more

Souastre

Image
Souastre — miejscowość i gmina — Herb Państwo   Francja Region Hauts-de-France Departament Pas-de-Calais Okręg Arras Kod INSEE 62800 Powierzchnia 7,18 km² Populacja  (1990) • liczba ludności 352 • gęstość 49 os./km² Kod pocztowy 62111 Położenie na mapie Francji Souastre 50°09′N   2°34′E / 50,150000   2,566667 Portal Francja Souastre – miejscowość i gmina we Francji, w regionie Hauts-de-France, w departamencie Pas-de-Calais. Według danych na rok 1990 gminę zamieszkiwały 352 osoby, a gęstość zaludnienia wynosiła 49 osób/km² (wśród 1549 gmin regionu Nord-Pas-de-Calais Souastre plasuje się na 887. miejscu pod względem liczby ludności, natomiast pod względem powierzchni na miejscu 507.). Bibliografia | Francuski urząd statystyczny ( fr. ) . p   •   d   •   e Gminy okręgu Arras Ablain-Saint-Nazaire Ablainzevelle Acheville Achicourt Achiet-le-Grand Achiet-le-Pe
Read more