Is there a nice way to use the group isomorphism theorems in this proof?











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












The following theorem is an exercise in the section of a textbook dealing with the group isomorphism theorems. However, I did not use the isomorphism theorems to prove this theorem, so I wonder if there might be a cleaner way using them?



Theorem: Let $(A, cdot)$, $(B, ast)$ be groups, let $f: A mapsto B$ be a homomorphism, and let $S^ast leqslant B$. Then:
$$textrm{Ker}(f) leqslant f^{-1}(S^ast) = {x in A mid f(x) in S^ast} leqslant A $$



Proof. Let $x, y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Then, we know that there exists elements $f(x), f(y) in S^ast$. Since $S^ast leqslant B$, $f(x) ast f(y) in S^ast$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, $f(x) ast f(y) = f(x cdot y) in S^ast$. This means that $x cdot y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is closed under the group operation.



Since $S^ast$ is a subgroup, we know that if $f(x) in S^ast$ (where $x in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), then there exists an element $f(y) in S^ast$ (where $y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), such that $f(x) ast f(y) = textrm{id}_{B}$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, it must be that $y = x^{-1}$. Thus, $x^{-1} in f^{-1}(S^ast)$.



Thus, we have shown that $f^{-1}(S^ast)$, and every element in it has its inverse within the set too, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is a subgroup of $A$. It remains to show that $textrm{Ker}(f) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Since $S^ast$ is a group, $textrm{id}_{B} in S^ast$. Therefore, $textrm{Ker}(f) = f^{-1}(textrm{id}_{B}) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$.










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    The following theorem is an exercise in the section of a textbook dealing with the group isomorphism theorems. However, I did not use the isomorphism theorems to prove this theorem, so I wonder if there might be a cleaner way using them?



    Theorem: Let $(A, cdot)$, $(B, ast)$ be groups, let $f: A mapsto B$ be a homomorphism, and let $S^ast leqslant B$. Then:
    $$textrm{Ker}(f) leqslant f^{-1}(S^ast) = {x in A mid f(x) in S^ast} leqslant A $$



    Proof. Let $x, y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Then, we know that there exists elements $f(x), f(y) in S^ast$. Since $S^ast leqslant B$, $f(x) ast f(y) in S^ast$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, $f(x) ast f(y) = f(x cdot y) in S^ast$. This means that $x cdot y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is closed under the group operation.



    Since $S^ast$ is a subgroup, we know that if $f(x) in S^ast$ (where $x in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), then there exists an element $f(y) in S^ast$ (where $y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), such that $f(x) ast f(y) = textrm{id}_{B}$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, it must be that $y = x^{-1}$. Thus, $x^{-1} in f^{-1}(S^ast)$.



    Thus, we have shown that $f^{-1}(S^ast)$, and every element in it has its inverse within the set too, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is a subgroup of $A$. It remains to show that $textrm{Ker}(f) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Since $S^ast$ is a group, $textrm{id}_{B} in S^ast$. Therefore, $textrm{Ker}(f) = f^{-1}(textrm{id}_{B}) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$.










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      The following theorem is an exercise in the section of a textbook dealing with the group isomorphism theorems. However, I did not use the isomorphism theorems to prove this theorem, so I wonder if there might be a cleaner way using them?



      Theorem: Let $(A, cdot)$, $(B, ast)$ be groups, let $f: A mapsto B$ be a homomorphism, and let $S^ast leqslant B$. Then:
      $$textrm{Ker}(f) leqslant f^{-1}(S^ast) = {x in A mid f(x) in S^ast} leqslant A $$



      Proof. Let $x, y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Then, we know that there exists elements $f(x), f(y) in S^ast$. Since $S^ast leqslant B$, $f(x) ast f(y) in S^ast$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, $f(x) ast f(y) = f(x cdot y) in S^ast$. This means that $x cdot y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is closed under the group operation.



      Since $S^ast$ is a subgroup, we know that if $f(x) in S^ast$ (where $x in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), then there exists an element $f(y) in S^ast$ (where $y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), such that $f(x) ast f(y) = textrm{id}_{B}$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, it must be that $y = x^{-1}$. Thus, $x^{-1} in f^{-1}(S^ast)$.



      Thus, we have shown that $f^{-1}(S^ast)$, and every element in it has its inverse within the set too, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is a subgroup of $A$. It remains to show that $textrm{Ker}(f) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Since $S^ast$ is a group, $textrm{id}_{B} in S^ast$. Therefore, $textrm{Ker}(f) = f^{-1}(textrm{id}_{B}) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$.










      share|cite|improve this question















      The following theorem is an exercise in the section of a textbook dealing with the group isomorphism theorems. However, I did not use the isomorphism theorems to prove this theorem, so I wonder if there might be a cleaner way using them?



      Theorem: Let $(A, cdot)$, $(B, ast)$ be groups, let $f: A mapsto B$ be a homomorphism, and let $S^ast leqslant B$. Then:
      $$textrm{Ker}(f) leqslant f^{-1}(S^ast) = {x in A mid f(x) in S^ast} leqslant A $$



      Proof. Let $x, y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Then, we know that there exists elements $f(x), f(y) in S^ast$. Since $S^ast leqslant B$, $f(x) ast f(y) in S^ast$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, $f(x) ast f(y) = f(x cdot y) in S^ast$. This means that $x cdot y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is closed under the group operation.



      Since $S^ast$ is a subgroup, we know that if $f(x) in S^ast$ (where $x in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), then there exists an element $f(y) in S^ast$ (where $y in f^{-1}(S^ast)$), such that $f(x) ast f(y) = textrm{id}_{B}$. Since $f$ is a homomorphism, it must be that $y = x^{-1}$. Thus, $x^{-1} in f^{-1}(S^ast)$.



      Thus, we have shown that $f^{-1}(S^ast)$, and every element in it has its inverse within the set too, so $f^{-1}(S^ast)$ is a subgroup of $A$. It remains to show that $textrm{Ker}(f) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$. Since $S^ast$ is a group, $textrm{id}_{B} in S^ast$. Therefore, $textrm{Ker}(f) = f^{-1}(textrm{id}_{B}) subset f^{-1}(S^ast)$.







      group-theory alternative-proof group-isomorphism






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 22 at 1:05

























      asked Nov 21 at 5:40









      user89

      6711647




      6711647






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          1
          down vote



          accepted










          I don't believe the isomorphism theorems are necessary in order to prove the theorem. Your proof is the one I would use. Just because the exercise happens to appear in a section dealing with isomorphism theorems does not mean that isomorphism theorems are necessary for the proof. Now, if the exercise had specifically mentioned to use the isomorphism theorems in the proof, that would be different, but again I don't see how the isomorphism theorems would be helpful here.






          share|cite|improve this answer




























            up vote
            1
            down vote













            I think there is something which is not totally clear in this proof. As for the first part, everything is ok.



            In the second part, you say that since $f(x) in S^*$ then there must be $f(y) in S^*$ such that $f(x)*f(y)=1_B$. Actually I would only deduce that there is $v in S^*$ such that $f(x)*v=1_B$. And maybe I can guess your doubts about surjectivity came from here.



            A way to make it more understandable (at least to me!) is the following. Let $x in f^{-1}(S^*)$, so that as you said $f(x) in S^*$. Take $y=x^{-1}$. You have to prove that $y in f^{-1}(S^*)$, i.e. $f(y) in S^*$. But $f(x)*f(y)=f(x cdot y)=f(1_A)=1_B$ so that $f(y)$ is the inverse of $f(x)$ in $B$. Since $S^*$ is a subgroup, it is close for taking inverses and we are done.



            Sorry if I wrote so much, I tried to be as clear as I could :)






            share|cite|improve this answer





















              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',
              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%2f3007311%2fis-there-a-nice-way-to-use-the-group-isomorphism-theorems-in-this-proof%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








              up vote
              1
              down vote



              accepted










              I don't believe the isomorphism theorems are necessary in order to prove the theorem. Your proof is the one I would use. Just because the exercise happens to appear in a section dealing with isomorphism theorems does not mean that isomorphism theorems are necessary for the proof. Now, if the exercise had specifically mentioned to use the isomorphism theorems in the proof, that would be different, but again I don't see how the isomorphism theorems would be helpful here.






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                1
                down vote



                accepted










                I don't believe the isomorphism theorems are necessary in order to prove the theorem. Your proof is the one I would use. Just because the exercise happens to appear in a section dealing with isomorphism theorems does not mean that isomorphism theorems are necessary for the proof. Now, if the exercise had specifically mentioned to use the isomorphism theorems in the proof, that would be different, but again I don't see how the isomorphism theorems would be helpful here.






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote



                  accepted







                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote



                  accepted






                  I don't believe the isomorphism theorems are necessary in order to prove the theorem. Your proof is the one I would use. Just because the exercise happens to appear in a section dealing with isomorphism theorems does not mean that isomorphism theorems are necessary for the proof. Now, if the exercise had specifically mentioned to use the isomorphism theorems in the proof, that would be different, but again I don't see how the isomorphism theorems would be helpful here.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  I don't believe the isomorphism theorems are necessary in order to prove the theorem. Your proof is the one I would use. Just because the exercise happens to appear in a section dealing with isomorphism theorems does not mean that isomorphism theorems are necessary for the proof. Now, if the exercise had specifically mentioned to use the isomorphism theorems in the proof, that would be different, but again I don't see how the isomorphism theorems would be helpful here.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 21 at 6:03









                  Monstrous Moonshiner

                  2,25511337




                  2,25511337






















                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      I think there is something which is not totally clear in this proof. As for the first part, everything is ok.



                      In the second part, you say that since $f(x) in S^*$ then there must be $f(y) in S^*$ such that $f(x)*f(y)=1_B$. Actually I would only deduce that there is $v in S^*$ such that $f(x)*v=1_B$. And maybe I can guess your doubts about surjectivity came from here.



                      A way to make it more understandable (at least to me!) is the following. Let $x in f^{-1}(S^*)$, so that as you said $f(x) in S^*$. Take $y=x^{-1}$. You have to prove that $y in f^{-1}(S^*)$, i.e. $f(y) in S^*$. But $f(x)*f(y)=f(x cdot y)=f(1_A)=1_B$ so that $f(y)$ is the inverse of $f(x)$ in $B$. Since $S^*$ is a subgroup, it is close for taking inverses and we are done.



                      Sorry if I wrote so much, I tried to be as clear as I could :)






                      share|cite|improve this answer

























                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        I think there is something which is not totally clear in this proof. As for the first part, everything is ok.



                        In the second part, you say that since $f(x) in S^*$ then there must be $f(y) in S^*$ such that $f(x)*f(y)=1_B$. Actually I would only deduce that there is $v in S^*$ such that $f(x)*v=1_B$. And maybe I can guess your doubts about surjectivity came from here.



                        A way to make it more understandable (at least to me!) is the following. Let $x in f^{-1}(S^*)$, so that as you said $f(x) in S^*$. Take $y=x^{-1}$. You have to prove that $y in f^{-1}(S^*)$, i.e. $f(y) in S^*$. But $f(x)*f(y)=f(x cdot y)=f(1_A)=1_B$ so that $f(y)$ is the inverse of $f(x)$ in $B$. Since $S^*$ is a subgroup, it is close for taking inverses and we are done.



                        Sorry if I wrote so much, I tried to be as clear as I could :)






                        share|cite|improve this answer























                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote









                          I think there is something which is not totally clear in this proof. As for the first part, everything is ok.



                          In the second part, you say that since $f(x) in S^*$ then there must be $f(y) in S^*$ such that $f(x)*f(y)=1_B$. Actually I would only deduce that there is $v in S^*$ such that $f(x)*v=1_B$. And maybe I can guess your doubts about surjectivity came from here.



                          A way to make it more understandable (at least to me!) is the following. Let $x in f^{-1}(S^*)$, so that as you said $f(x) in S^*$. Take $y=x^{-1}$. You have to prove that $y in f^{-1}(S^*)$, i.e. $f(y) in S^*$. But $f(x)*f(y)=f(x cdot y)=f(1_A)=1_B$ so that $f(y)$ is the inverse of $f(x)$ in $B$. Since $S^*$ is a subgroup, it is close for taking inverses and we are done.



                          Sorry if I wrote so much, I tried to be as clear as I could :)






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          I think there is something which is not totally clear in this proof. As for the first part, everything is ok.



                          In the second part, you say that since $f(x) in S^*$ then there must be $f(y) in S^*$ such that $f(x)*f(y)=1_B$. Actually I would only deduce that there is $v in S^*$ such that $f(x)*v=1_B$. And maybe I can guess your doubts about surjectivity came from here.



                          A way to make it more understandable (at least to me!) is the following. Let $x in f^{-1}(S^*)$, so that as you said $f(x) in S^*$. Take $y=x^{-1}$. You have to prove that $y in f^{-1}(S^*)$, i.e. $f(y) in S^*$. But $f(x)*f(y)=f(x cdot y)=f(1_A)=1_B$ so that $f(y)$ is the inverse of $f(x)$ in $B$. Since $S^*$ is a subgroup, it is close for taking inverses and we are done.



                          Sorry if I wrote so much, I tried to be as clear as I could :)







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Nov 22 at 1:58









                          Pietro Gheri

                          1462




                          1462






























                              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%2f3007311%2fis-there-a-nice-way-to-use-the-group-isomorphism-theorems-in-this-proof%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

                              Bundesstraße 106

                              Verónica Boquete

                              Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten