Results 1 to 5 of 5
Like Tree2Thanks
  • 1 Post By Deveno
  • 1 Post By Deveno

Math Help - Proof involving automophism

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    23

    Proof involving automophism

    Show that ϕa ∈ Inn(g) is an automorphism of G.

    Any help on this, I'm kinda lost.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Mar 2011
    From
    Tejas
    Posts
    3,312
    Thanks
    693

    Re: Proof involving automophism

    what is an automorphism of G?

    1. it is a homomorphism from G to G
    2. it is bijective

    so we have to check conditions (1) and (2) above.

    to prove (1), we need to show that \phi_a(xy) = \phi_a(x)\phi_a(y) for all x,y in G.

    but \phi_a(xy) = a(xy)a^{-1} = (axa^{-1})(aya^{-1}) =\dots can you continue?

    to prove (2), we have to show 2 things as well:

    2.a. \phi_a is injective
    2.b. \phi_a is surjective

    to prove (2.a) it suffices to show that \mathrm{ker}(\phi_a) = \{e\}. so suppose x \in \mathrm{ker}(\phi_a).

    this means that axa^{-1} = e, so ax = a, so what can we say about x? (what is the unique element of G such that ax = a?).

    to prove (2.b) for any y in G, we need to find some x in G with \phi_a(x) = y. how about x = a^{-1}ya ?

    *******

    alternately, to show \phi_a is bijective, we could exhibit a (two-sided) inverse. what is the logical candidate for (\phi_a)^{-1} ?

    (maybe \phi_{a^{-1}}? can you prove this ?)
    Thanks from Johngalt13
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    23

    Re: Proof involving automophism

    Thanks!

    I think I got it, I'm a little lost on how to handle the step where you go from ϕa(xy)=a(xy)a^-1 though still

    If ϕ is given an operation I get it, but how do you know what to do when you don't really know what the mapping is?

    Thanks
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Mar 2011
    From
    Tejas
    Posts
    3,312
    Thanks
    693

    Re: Proof involving automophism

    by definition the inner automorphism of G induced by an element a of G, is conjugation by a:

    \phi_a(x) = axa^{-1}, for all x in G.

    since xy is an element of G, \phi_a(xy) is xy conjugated by a: \phi_a(xy) = a(xy)a^{-1}.

    in other words there are two groups at play here:

    one group is G, whose elements are just elements of the set G.

    the other group is Aut(G) whose elements are functions (special functions, that preserve the multiplication of G, and are bijective).

    in G, we multiply. in Aut(G), we compose functions.

    now, for any element g in G, there is an element \phi_g in Aut(G), called the inner automorphism induced by G.

    and, in fact, the mapping g \mapsto \phi_g is a homomorphism itself of G into Aut(G).

    the image of the homomorphism is a subgroup of Aut(G), called the group of inner automorphisms of G, or Inn(G).

    the thing is, this usually ISN'T an isomorphism, because two different elements of G might give the same automorphism.

    let's look at an example:

    suppose G = D_4 = \{1,r,r^2,r^3,s,rs,r^2s,r^3s\} where r^4 = s^2 = 1, sr = r^{-1}s.

    let's compute the different automorphisms \phi_g.

    first of all, it's clear that \phi_1(g) = 1g1^{-1} = 1g1 = g for all g \in D_4.

    this is a special automorphism, the identity automorphism, which is the identity of Inn(G) (and of Aut(G), as well).

    you may take my word for it (or verify it yourself) that r^2 commutes with all of D_4.

    so \phi_{r^2}(g) = r^2gr^{-2} = gr^2r^{-2} = g1 = g, so \phi_{r^2} = \phi_1 even though 1 \neq r^2.

    next, let's look at \phi_r.

    \phi_r(1) = r1r^{-1} = rr^{-1} = 1 (duh!)

    \phi_r(r^k) = r(r^k)r^{-1} = r^{1+k-1} = r^k so \phi_r is the identity on \langle r \rangle.

    \phi_r(s) = rsr^{-1} = rsr^3 = r(sr)r^2 = r(r^{-1}s)r^2 = sr^2 = (sr)r = (r^{-1}s)r
    = r^{-1}(sr) = r^{-1}(r^{-1}s) = r^{-2}s = r^2s

    \phi_r(r^ks) = r(r^ks)r^{-1} = (r^k)(rsr^{-1}) = r^{k+2 (mod\ 4)}s

    (so for example, \phi_r(r^3s) = r^5s = rs).

    i will leave it to you to prove that \phi_r = \phi_{r^3}.

    next we look at \phi_s:

    \phi_s(1) = 1 (easy)

    \phi_s(r) = srs^{-1} = (sr)s = (r^{-1}s)s = r^3s^2 = r^31 = r^3

    \phi_s(r^2) = sr^2s = (srs)(srs) = r^6 = r^2

    \phi_s(r^3) = sr^3s = (srs)(srs)(srs) = r^9 = r

    \phi_s(s) = s^3 = s

    \phi_s(rs) = s(rs)s = srs^2 = sr = r^{-1}s = r^3s

    \phi_s(r^2s) = s(r^2s)s = sr^2 = r^2s

    \phi_s(r^3s) = s(r^3s)s = sr^3 = sr(r^2) = r^2(sr) = r^2(r^{-1}s) = rs

    i will state without proof that \phi_s = \phi_{r^2s} , and that you can compute \phi_{rs} by composing \phi_r and \phi_s.

    it follows that \phi_{r^3s} = \phi_{r^2} \circ \phi_{rs} = \phi_1 \circ \phi_{rs} = \phi_{rs}.

    in fact (you can verify the details yourself, it's good practice for you): \mathrm{Inn}(D_4) = \{\phi_1,\phi_r,\phi_s,\phi_{rs}\}.
    Thanks from Johngalt13
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    23

    Re: Proof involving automophism

    Thanks a lot! That was incredibly helpful
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Proof involving GCD
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: October 11th 2010, 03:15 PM
  2. Proof involving e
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 2nd 2010, 03:44 PM
  3. Proof involving permutations
    Posted in the Advanced Math Topics Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 10th 2010, 01:03 AM
  4. Proof involving GCD
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: December 5th 2009, 04:36 PM
  5. Proof involving sets
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 19th 2008, 12:00 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum