and
. If
and
, we have
, so the only set
with this composition law and identity is the set
.
a)
b)
, but
in general. Consider for example the permutations
, so
, but
.
a)
is a subgroup of
b)
is a subgroup of
.
c) Positive integers are not a subgroup of
, as they do not contain inverse elements of even 0.
d) The positive reals form a subgroup of
.
e) The set
is not a subgroup of
, as it does not contain the identity matrix.
Let
be a subgroup of
. If
has an identity element (possibly different from the identity of
), then we have
, and multiplying both sides by
shows the identity elements are the same. Similarly if
has an inverse in
, we necessarily have
implying the inverses are the same.
Using the standard Euclidean algorithm we get
and
.
Let
be positive integers such that
is a prime number. Then, if
, we have
, so
. Because we want
to be prime, the only possibility is
.
Let
and
such that
. Then
so
.
Assume that a group
doesn't have a proper subgroup. Then
must be finite. If
is infinite, take any
such that
doesn't generate
, and consider the set
. Since
does not generate
,
is a proper subgroup of
, as is easy to show.
has to be cyclic. Indeed, assume
is not cyclic, so no single element generates
. Then, for any element
,
is a subgroup of
, since
is finite.
has to have a prime number order. For contradiction, assume the order of
is
. Then, since
is a finite cyclic group, generated by an element
, we have that
is a proper subgroup.
- Finally, if
has a prime order, no element of
generates a proper subgroup of
. This is because any element is of the form
for some element
and integer
. From Proposition 2.4.3 we know that the order of
is
, where
is the order of the group and
. In this case
is a prime number, so the order of
is either
or 1 (in the case that
).
Let
be a cyclic group. Take any subgroup
. We assume
is finite (as the finite case has the main focus in the book, and in fact the definition on page 46 implicitly assumes so), so that
is finite as well. Let
. Then, since
is a subgroup, for every
it holds
. Hence, for the exponents
for which
, it holds
. Theorem 2.3.3 tells us that we can write
for some integer
. This shows that any element of
is of the form
so
.
Elementary matrices of the first type are matrices
with the entries
,
for exactly one pair of indices
and 0 otherwise. It is easy to see from the determinant formula that the determinant of such matrices is always 1. From the product rule for the determinant it follows that all products of such matrices have determinant 1.
For the other direction, we consider the 2 by 2 case first and let
with
. Adding a scaled row to the other row and using the relation between the entries, we can manipulate the matrix as
.
Since we can arrive to the identity matrix using only operations corresponding to multiplication with matrices of the first type and the condition
, the original matrix
can be produced from the identity by reversing the operations. Hence, we can generate
with only elementary matrices of the first type.The general case follows by induction: for any
matrix with determinant 1, assume we can manipulate
into the form
,
where
and
. It is easy to see that we can further manipulate
as follows:
.
Note that in the second step the element
manipulates to 1 as we eliminate the row entries of the vector
, since otherwise the determinant of the manipulated matrix would not be equal to 1.
Elements of order 2 necessarily swap a pair of elements, or two pairs of elements. Such permutations are
totaling 9 permutations or order 2.
a) Any transposition that swaps elements
has a permutation matrix
that is an identity matrix where rows
have been swapped. These are elementary matrices of the second type. Any permutation matrix
corresponding to a permutation in
is an identity matrix whose rows have been permuted according to the permutation. From the permutation interpretation of
we know that
is invertible, so by Theorem 1.2.6 it is a product of elementary matrices. It is easy to see that only elementary matrices of type 2 are essential in such a product, as scaling or adding rows together are not needed. Hence,
can be decomposed into a product of elementary matrices of the second type, implying that the permutation is a product of transpositions.
b) First we show the following claim:
Claim: Any product of two transpositions can be written as a product of three-cycles.
Proof: Let
be a product of two transpositions, where
are some integers (possible some equal). Then we can write
.
Since any permutation in
is generated by transpositions, and the determinant of a transposition matrix is
, any permutation in
is a product of an even number of transpositions. Let
be a permutation, with a decomposition into transpositions
. Then we can group the product as
, where each product of two transpositions is also expressible as a product of three-cycles as shown in Claim.
Let
so that
. Then
so
is a group homomorphism. We have
and
.
Any homomorphism
satisfies
, so
must be a linear function with integer coefficient. In other words,
with
. For
to be injective, it suffices that
. For
to be surjective, we need
, since clearly
. The surjective functions
are also bijective, so they are isomorphisms.
Two elements
are conjugate, if for some
,
. It is easy to see that for the given matrices, any matrix of the form
with
does the job. This matrix is also invertible, as its determinant is
. Since the determinant is negative, the matrices are not conjugate in
.
Let
, and
be a relation given by
if and only if there exists
such that
Reflexivity:
, so
.
Symmetry: if
, then
, so
. Hence
, and vice versa.
Transitivity: if
and
, then
and
, so
. Therefore
.
- The set
defines an equivalence relation on
that is the same as the usual "=" relation on the reals.
- The relation defined by the empty set satisfies symmetry and transitivity, but fails reflexivity.
- The locus
satisfies symmetry and transitivity, but fails reflexivity (for example
is not true).
- The locus
is reflexive (
because
), symmetric (since
) and transitive (If
and
are solutions to the equation, then by symmetry also
and
are. Therefore also
and thus
is a solution.)
The number of equivalence relations in a set is equal to the number of partitions of the set. If the set has 5 elements, we have the following partitions:
- Partitions to 1 set: 1
- Partitions to 2 sets of sizes 1, 4: 5
- Partitions to 2 sets of sizes 2, 3:

- Partitions to 3 sets of sizes 1, 1, 3:

- Partitions to 3 sets of sizes 1, 2, 2:

- Partitions to 4 sets of sizes 1, 1, 1, 2:

- Partitions to 5 sets of size 1 each: 1
The total number of partitions is thus 52.
Let
be a group such that
for some prime
. For any
,
is a subgroup of
and by Lemma 2.8.7 has order
where
. If
, we are done as we have found an element of order
. Otherwise, consider
and notice that
, so
has order
.
For a group
of 35 elements we have a few cases.
- If the group is cyclic, i.e.,
, we have that
has order 7 and
has order 5.
- If the group is not cyclic, then for every
there is some integer
such that
is a subgroup of
order
. The order of
divides the order of
, so if
is not the identity, the order of
is either 5 or 7. Assume
is of order 5 and there is another element
of order 5 that is not a power of
. Then the subgroup of
generated by
and
has order 25. Indeed, all elements
for
are distinct (if not, we have for
that
, which implies that
is a power of
), and there is 25 ways to choose the exponents. But 25 does not divide 35, so there cannot be another subgroup of order 5, and thus any element
that is not a power of
must generate a cyclic group of order 7.
If a group
contains an element
of order 6 and an element
of order 10, then
and
are subgroups of
and thus 6 and 10 divide the order of
. Hence, we can say that
.
Let
be a subgroup such that
. Then, since left (and right) cosets partition the group, we have
for some
. Because
, we must have
and so by Proposition 2.8.17
is normal.
For an example that this is not true for
such that
, consider
and
. Since
, we have indeed
. Then,
and
, so
is not normal.
Claim 1: For all
we have
.
Proof: Assume that
. Then
, since
. But since
, we have
, which contradicts the assumption that the cosets of
partition
.
Claim 2: For all
we have
.
Proof: Assume
for some
. Then we have
for some
. This implies
, and by Claim 1 we have
, so
. But then
, so unless
we have a contradiction.
Claim 1 and Claim 2 together prove that
is a subgroup of
.
The numbers involved are so small that solving by brute force becomes viable. To solve
we note that
so
so
.
To investigate the congruence
we note by computing every possibility that there is no element
modulo 6. Therefore there is no solution to the congruence.
Given equations
we can solve
and substitute to the other congruence equation to obtain
. This equation has a solution exactly when there exists
modulo
, or in other words an integer
such that
. This translates to saying that the equation
must have an integer solution
. But that is only possible when
.
It is not clear from the problem statement what the answer should look like. Therefore, the following candidate for answer might not be what is intended.
We show that each cycle of the form
has sign
. This is easy to see, as we can decompose
. Each transposition corresponds to an elementary matrix of type two, which has determinant
. The product form of the cycle has
transpositions, so the sign is as claimed. Therefore, if a permutation has a cycle decomposition to
cycles, each having
terms, the sign of the permutation is
.
Let
and
. We have
, and
has the subgroups
and
the subgroups
. The correspondences given by
are thus
Subgroup in
|
Subgroup in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notice that the subgroups
and
do not contain
.
Let
and assume
is generated by an element
. Then, for every element of
we would have
for some
. But since
are infinite, there are no
such that
and
, since the first condition would require
and the second
. The assumption that
are infinite means that
and
.
a)
is isomorphic to
by the function
given by
which has the inverse
. Seeing that
is a homomorphism is a direct consequence of multiplication rules of real numbers and properties of absolute value.
b) Let
be the set of invertible upper triangular matrices,
the set of invertible diagonal matrices and
the set of upper diagonal matrices with ones on the diagonal. In order to have a homomorphism
, we must have
,
for appropriate reals
and
. Using this notation for we have
. (1)
On the other hand,
. (2)
For
to be a homomorphism, we require these two to evaluate equal. However, the second coordinate in (1) has a dependency on
and
, whereas (2) does not have it. Hence, (1) and (2) are not equal in general.
c) Let
,
(the angles of a circle with sum as the group operation) and
. Then
is isomorphic to
via the homomorphism
given by
. That
is a bijective homomorphism follows easily from the polar form representation of complex numbers.
Let
be a subgroup of
. Clearly
is not normal, as
. Then
and
. It is a straightforward computation to check that
. This set has 4 elements, but all cosets must have size 2, so it is not a coset.
Let
be the group of upper triangular matrices
with
.
a) Let
be the subset of
defined by
, i.e., the set of invertible diagonal matrices. It is easy to see that
is a group, as the inverse for each such matrix is also a diagonal matrix, and the product of two diagonal matrices is a diagonal matrix, and the identity is a diagonal matrix.
is however not a normal subgroup, since for any
with inverse
we can compute
,
which is not in
when
.
b) Let
be the subset of
defined by
. Again, it is easy to see that
is a subgroup of
. As above, we can compute
,
so
is a normal subgroup. The cosets are the sets containing the matrices
,
which are distinguished by the parameter
, as the variables
can be chosen arbitrarily (as long as
). Hence, the quotient group is isomorphic to
. The homomorphism whose kernel
is is given by
.
c) Let
be the subset of
defined by
. Then again
is clearly a subgroup of
. We have
,
so
is a normal subgroup.To investigate the cosets of this group, we compute
.
Here we can choose
as we like, so the top-right element doesn't impose any conditions on the cosets. Then, the elements of
for which it holds
generates a coset of
uniquely. This way we also obtain all cosets of
, since for every choice of
we can choose
and we see that this element is in the coset generated by
.
The quotient group is again isomorphic to
with the homomorphism whose kernel
is given by
.
a) We observe the following:
- Reflexivity: A point
is connected to itself by the path
. If
, then the path is contained in
.
- Symmetry: Let
such that there exists a path
from
to
contained in
. Then the path
is a path from
to
contained in 
- Transitivity. If
such that
is a path from
to
contained in
and
from
to
contained in
, then
is a path from
to
contained in
.
b) Path connection is an equivalence relation as shown in part a). Hence, path connected subsets partition the set
. In particular, the transitivity property ensures that if two points can be path connected, any points connected to those two points can be connected with both of the points.
a) Let
such that
given by
and
given by
. Then
connects
to
. This path is also in
, since both paths
and
are in
and
is a group.
b) We show that for any matrix
, also the matrix
for any
. If
is the path joining
and
, simply consider the path
, since
. Hence, all matrices connected to identity by path form a normal subgroup.
a) Elementary matrices of the first type are matrices
with the entries
,
for exactly one pair of indices
and 0 otherwise. For each such
, there is a path to
just by setting
as the same matrix as
, with the exception that the element
. Clearly this is a continuous path from
to
, and since
is an elementary matrix of the first type, it also has determinant 1, and thus the path stays in
. Now, if we have the elementary matrices of the first type
, we have by M.7 a) that
is connected to
, as
are connected to
. We have now shown that any product of elementary matrices of type 1 are path connected to
, which implies that
is path connected, as the elementary matrices of type 1 generate
.
b) Let
such that
. We can path connect
to a matrix with determinant 1 by
so that
. This path is composition of continuous functions since
and
has always positive determinant, so it is a continuous path in
. Therefore, matrices with
form a connected component of
. By the same reasoning, if we just assumed that
, we can reason that the matrices with
form a connected component of
.
What remains to show is that these components are not connected. Let
be a matrix with a positive determinant and
a path connecting
to a matrix
with a negative determinant. Then,
has elements
that are continuous functions. From the determinant formula (1.6.4) we see that the determinant is then also a continuous function of the elements, as it is a sum of product of continuous functions. Then, since
and
, we must have
for some
. Therefore
is a path not contained in
, and hence
is a disjoint union of two connected components.
Double cosets partition a group. Indeed, for every
, the double coset
contains
, since
. On the other hand, if
, then there are elements
such that
. This implies that
, and since
are subgroups,
, so
. This implies in turn that
.
Multiplying from the left with the matrices
and their inverses corresponds to adding and subtracting rows. Multiplying from the right corresponds to adding and subtracting columns. Now, consider any
.
Claim 1: We can bring the matrix to the form
where
or
only by adding and subtracting rows.
Proof. If
, we have
since the matrix has determinant 1, so we can add the second column to the first one to obtain another matrix with determinant 1, whose entry on the first column, second row is non-zero. So we assume from now on that
. Using the row operations, we can perform what is essentially the Euclidean algorithm on the first column by subtracting the smaller column 1 element from the larger. Since
, we have
, which implies that
and so the row operation Euclidean algorithm terminates once it produces 1 on one of the rows of the 1st column.
Now, using the matrix produced in Claim 1, we can simply bring the matrix to the identity form only by applying row and column additions/subtractions. Hence, we have
, where
are some of the matrices
and their inverses.This can be solved to show that
.