A subgroup in Group theory
$begingroup$
I am currently studying group theory, and its a quite new concept for me.
When learning about subgroups, I bumped into something.
In a problem where one wants to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B?
i.e.
If we know for sure that B is a group,
and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B,
can we conclude that A is a group?
group-theory
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am currently studying group theory, and its a quite new concept for me.
When learning about subgroups, I bumped into something.
In a problem where one wants to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B?
i.e.
If we know for sure that B is a group,
and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B,
can we conclude that A is a group?
group-theory
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Suppose set B is a group and A is a subset of B. If A is a subgroup, then A is also a group. So, yes.
$endgroup$
– Axion004
Jan 5 at 14:29
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am currently studying group theory, and its a quite new concept for me.
When learning about subgroups, I bumped into something.
In a problem where one wants to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B?
i.e.
If we know for sure that B is a group,
and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B,
can we conclude that A is a group?
group-theory
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
$endgroup$
I am currently studying group theory, and its a quite new concept for me.
When learning about subgroups, I bumped into something.
In a problem where one wants to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B?
i.e.
If we know for sure that B is a group,
and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B,
can we conclude that A is a group?
group-theory
group-theory
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
asked Jan 5 at 14:26
bladieblabladiebla
233
233
2
$begingroup$
Suppose set B is a group and A is a subset of B. If A is a subgroup, then A is also a group. So, yes.
$endgroup$
– Axion004
Jan 5 at 14:29
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Suppose set B is a group and A is a subset of B. If A is a subgroup, then A is also a group. So, yes.
$endgroup$
– Axion004
Jan 5 at 14:29
2
2
$begingroup$
Suppose set B is a group and A is a subset of B. If A is a subgroup, then A is also a group. So, yes.
$endgroup$
– Axion004
Jan 5 at 14:29
$begingroup$
Suppose set B is a group and A is a subset of B. If A is a subgroup, then A is also a group. So, yes.
$endgroup$
– Axion004
Jan 5 at 14:29
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It can be done easier. Let $G$ be a group and $U$ be a nonempty subset of $G$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ iff (1) for all $g,hin U$, $ghin U$, and (2) for each $gin U$, $g^{-1}in U$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ without checking the axioms point by point.
For instance, the unit element $ein G$ lies in $U$, since $U$ is nonempty and so $U$ has an element $g$. Then $g^{-1}in U$ by (2) and so by (1) $e= gg^{-1}in U$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm sure you know this but for the OP: We can also collapse it down to just one condition: $U$ is a subgroup of $G$ $iff$ $forall (a in U) forall (b in U) ab^{-1} in U$ (this is often said verbally as "the subset is closed under subtraction", because in additive notation $ab^{-1}$ is denoted as $a-b$. And when you will study rings, you will switch to the additive notation for groups)
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:41
$begingroup$
Surely, the ''subgroup criterion''.
$endgroup$
– Wuestenfux
Jan 5 at 14:42
$begingroup$
Yes ${}{}{}{}{}$
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, as associativity may not be satisfied within the set. Consider, for instance, the structure $(S,*)$, with $S={1,a,b}$, and the following definition table for $*$:
$$
begin{matrix}
* & bf1 & bf{a} & bf{b} \
bf1 & 1 & a & b \
bf{a} & a & 1 & b \
bf{b} & b & a & 1
end{matrix}
$$
This satisfies the conditions for being a subgroup (it is closed under * and inverses, and it is nonempty), except for the fact that it is not in a group. But $(S,*)$ is not a group, because associativity fails: $1=a(ba) neq (ab)a=a$
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I don't see what this has to do with the question.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:16
$begingroup$
The question reads: "...to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B...". I provide a counterexample to show that it is not enough. The structure (S,*) satisfies the conditions for a subgroup, but is not a group.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:37
$begingroup$
But if it's already a subset of a group with the same operation, it's automatically associative. We're not talking about an arbitrary operation.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:38
$begingroup$
To quote the question, "If we know for sure that B is a group, and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B, can we conclude that A is a group?"
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
I am not assuming that is a subset of a group. Maybe I missed the question.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:39
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
If $G$ is a group and $Hsubseteq G$, then $H$ is a subgroup of $G$ iff it is nonvoid and closed under multiplication and inversion. You do not need to verify all of the axioms in this case because much is inherited from $G$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
$endgroup$
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062766%2fa-subgroup-in-group-theory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It can be done easier. Let $G$ be a group and $U$ be a nonempty subset of $G$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ iff (1) for all $g,hin U$, $ghin U$, and (2) for each $gin U$, $g^{-1}in U$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ without checking the axioms point by point.
For instance, the unit element $ein G$ lies in $U$, since $U$ is nonempty and so $U$ has an element $g$. Then $g^{-1}in U$ by (2) and so by (1) $e= gg^{-1}in U$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm sure you know this but for the OP: We can also collapse it down to just one condition: $U$ is a subgroup of $G$ $iff$ $forall (a in U) forall (b in U) ab^{-1} in U$ (this is often said verbally as "the subset is closed under subtraction", because in additive notation $ab^{-1}$ is denoted as $a-b$. And when you will study rings, you will switch to the additive notation for groups)
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:41
$begingroup$
Surely, the ''subgroup criterion''.
$endgroup$
– Wuestenfux
Jan 5 at 14:42
$begingroup$
Yes ${}{}{}{}{}$
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It can be done easier. Let $G$ be a group and $U$ be a nonempty subset of $G$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ iff (1) for all $g,hin U$, $ghin U$, and (2) for each $gin U$, $g^{-1}in U$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ without checking the axioms point by point.
For instance, the unit element $ein G$ lies in $U$, since $U$ is nonempty and so $U$ has an element $g$. Then $g^{-1}in U$ by (2) and so by (1) $e= gg^{-1}in U$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm sure you know this but for the OP: We can also collapse it down to just one condition: $U$ is a subgroup of $G$ $iff$ $forall (a in U) forall (b in U) ab^{-1} in U$ (this is often said verbally as "the subset is closed under subtraction", because in additive notation $ab^{-1}$ is denoted as $a-b$. And when you will study rings, you will switch to the additive notation for groups)
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:41
$begingroup$
Surely, the ''subgroup criterion''.
$endgroup$
– Wuestenfux
Jan 5 at 14:42
$begingroup$
Yes ${}{}{}{}{}$
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It can be done easier. Let $G$ be a group and $U$ be a nonempty subset of $G$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ iff (1) for all $g,hin U$, $ghin U$, and (2) for each $gin U$, $g^{-1}in U$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ without checking the axioms point by point.
For instance, the unit element $ein G$ lies in $U$, since $U$ is nonempty and so $U$ has an element $g$. Then $g^{-1}in U$ by (2) and so by (1) $e= gg^{-1}in U$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
$endgroup$
It can be done easier. Let $G$ be a group and $U$ be a nonempty subset of $G$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ iff (1) for all $g,hin U$, $ghin U$, and (2) for each $gin U$, $g^{-1}in U$.
Then $U$ forms a subgroup of $G$ without checking the axioms point by point.
For instance, the unit element $ein G$ lies in $U$, since $U$ is nonempty and so $U$ has an element $g$. Then $g^{-1}in U$ by (2) and so by (1) $e= gg^{-1}in U$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
WuestenfuxWuestenfux
4,2281413
4,2281413
$begingroup$
I'm sure you know this but for the OP: We can also collapse it down to just one condition: $U$ is a subgroup of $G$ $iff$ $forall (a in U) forall (b in U) ab^{-1} in U$ (this is often said verbally as "the subset is closed under subtraction", because in additive notation $ab^{-1}$ is denoted as $a-b$. And when you will study rings, you will switch to the additive notation for groups)
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:41
$begingroup$
Surely, the ''subgroup criterion''.
$endgroup$
– Wuestenfux
Jan 5 at 14:42
$begingroup$
Yes ${}{}{}{}{}$
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm sure you know this but for the OP: We can also collapse it down to just one condition: $U$ is a subgroup of $G$ $iff$ $forall (a in U) forall (b in U) ab^{-1} in U$ (this is often said verbally as "the subset is closed under subtraction", because in additive notation $ab^{-1}$ is denoted as $a-b$. And when you will study rings, you will switch to the additive notation for groups)
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:41
$begingroup$
Surely, the ''subgroup criterion''.
$endgroup$
– Wuestenfux
Jan 5 at 14:42
$begingroup$
Yes ${}{}{}{}{}$
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:43
$begingroup$
I'm sure you know this but for the OP: We can also collapse it down to just one condition: $U$ is a subgroup of $G$ $iff$ $forall (a in U) forall (b in U) ab^{-1} in U$ (this is often said verbally as "the subset is closed under subtraction", because in additive notation $ab^{-1}$ is denoted as $a-b$. And when you will study rings, you will switch to the additive notation for groups)
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:41
$begingroup$
I'm sure you know this but for the OP: We can also collapse it down to just one condition: $U$ is a subgroup of $G$ $iff$ $forall (a in U) forall (b in U) ab^{-1} in U$ (this is often said verbally as "the subset is closed under subtraction", because in additive notation $ab^{-1}$ is denoted as $a-b$. And when you will study rings, you will switch to the additive notation for groups)
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:41
$begingroup$
Surely, the ''subgroup criterion''.
$endgroup$
– Wuestenfux
Jan 5 at 14:42
$begingroup$
Surely, the ''subgroup criterion''.
$endgroup$
– Wuestenfux
Jan 5 at 14:42
$begingroup$
Yes ${}{}{}{}{}$
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:43
$begingroup$
Yes ${}{}{}{}{}$
$endgroup$
– Ovi
Jan 5 at 14:43
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, as associativity may not be satisfied within the set. Consider, for instance, the structure $(S,*)$, with $S={1,a,b}$, and the following definition table for $*$:
$$
begin{matrix}
* & bf1 & bf{a} & bf{b} \
bf1 & 1 & a & b \
bf{a} & a & 1 & b \
bf{b} & b & a & 1
end{matrix}
$$
This satisfies the conditions for being a subgroup (it is closed under * and inverses, and it is nonempty), except for the fact that it is not in a group. But $(S,*)$ is not a group, because associativity fails: $1=a(ba) neq (ab)a=a$
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I don't see what this has to do with the question.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:16
$begingroup$
The question reads: "...to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B...". I provide a counterexample to show that it is not enough. The structure (S,*) satisfies the conditions for a subgroup, but is not a group.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:37
$begingroup$
But if it's already a subset of a group with the same operation, it's automatically associative. We're not talking about an arbitrary operation.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:38
$begingroup$
To quote the question, "If we know for sure that B is a group, and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B, can we conclude that A is a group?"
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
I am not assuming that is a subset of a group. Maybe I missed the question.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:39
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
No, as associativity may not be satisfied within the set. Consider, for instance, the structure $(S,*)$, with $S={1,a,b}$, and the following definition table for $*$:
$$
begin{matrix}
* & bf1 & bf{a} & bf{b} \
bf1 & 1 & a & b \
bf{a} & a & 1 & b \
bf{b} & b & a & 1
end{matrix}
$$
This satisfies the conditions for being a subgroup (it is closed under * and inverses, and it is nonempty), except for the fact that it is not in a group. But $(S,*)$ is not a group, because associativity fails: $1=a(ba) neq (ab)a=a$
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I don't see what this has to do with the question.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:16
$begingroup$
The question reads: "...to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B...". I provide a counterexample to show that it is not enough. The structure (S,*) satisfies the conditions for a subgroup, but is not a group.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:37
$begingroup$
But if it's already a subset of a group with the same operation, it's automatically associative. We're not talking about an arbitrary operation.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:38
$begingroup$
To quote the question, "If we know for sure that B is a group, and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B, can we conclude that A is a group?"
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
I am not assuming that is a subset of a group. Maybe I missed the question.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:39
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
No, as associativity may not be satisfied within the set. Consider, for instance, the structure $(S,*)$, with $S={1,a,b}$, and the following definition table for $*$:
$$
begin{matrix}
* & bf1 & bf{a} & bf{b} \
bf1 & 1 & a & b \
bf{a} & a & 1 & b \
bf{b} & b & a & 1
end{matrix}
$$
This satisfies the conditions for being a subgroup (it is closed under * and inverses, and it is nonempty), except for the fact that it is not in a group. But $(S,*)$ is not a group, because associativity fails: $1=a(ba) neq (ab)a=a$
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
$endgroup$
No, as associativity may not be satisfied within the set. Consider, for instance, the structure $(S,*)$, with $S={1,a,b}$, and the following definition table for $*$:
$$
begin{matrix}
* & bf1 & bf{a} & bf{b} \
bf1 & 1 & a & b \
bf{a} & a & 1 & b \
bf{b} & b & a & 1
end{matrix}
$$
This satisfies the conditions for being a subgroup (it is closed under * and inverses, and it is nonempty), except for the fact that it is not in a group. But $(S,*)$ is not a group, because associativity fails: $1=a(ba) neq (ab)a=a$
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
edited Jan 5 at 15:19
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
answered Jan 5 at 14:31
pendermathpendermath
52910
52910
1
$begingroup$
I don't see what this has to do with the question.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:16
$begingroup$
The question reads: "...to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B...". I provide a counterexample to show that it is not enough. The structure (S,*) satisfies the conditions for a subgroup, but is not a group.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:37
$begingroup$
But if it's already a subset of a group with the same operation, it's automatically associative. We're not talking about an arbitrary operation.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:38
$begingroup$
To quote the question, "If we know for sure that B is a group, and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B, can we conclude that A is a group?"
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
I am not assuming that is a subset of a group. Maybe I missed the question.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:39
|
show 3 more comments
1
$begingroup$
I don't see what this has to do with the question.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:16
$begingroup$
The question reads: "...to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B...". I provide a counterexample to show that it is not enough. The structure (S,*) satisfies the conditions for a subgroup, but is not a group.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:37
$begingroup$
But if it's already a subset of a group with the same operation, it's automatically associative. We're not talking about an arbitrary operation.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:38
$begingroup$
To quote the question, "If we know for sure that B is a group, and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B, can we conclude that A is a group?"
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
I am not assuming that is a subset of a group. Maybe I missed the question.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:39
1
1
$begingroup$
I don't see what this has to do with the question.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:16
$begingroup$
I don't see what this has to do with the question.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:16
$begingroup$
The question reads: "...to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B...". I provide a counterexample to show that it is not enough. The structure (S,*) satisfies the conditions for a subgroup, but is not a group.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:37
$begingroup$
The question reads: "...to show that some set A is a group, is it sufficient enough to show that that set (A) satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B...". I provide a counterexample to show that it is not enough. The structure (S,*) satisfies the conditions for a subgroup, but is not a group.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:37
$begingroup$
But if it's already a subset of a group with the same operation, it's automatically associative. We're not talking about an arbitrary operation.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:38
$begingroup$
But if it's already a subset of a group with the same operation, it's automatically associative. We're not talking about an arbitrary operation.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:38
$begingroup$
To quote the question, "If we know for sure that B is a group, and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B, can we conclude that A is a group?"
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
To quote the question, "If we know for sure that B is a group, and we show that some set A satisfies all axioms of being a subgroup of a group B, can we conclude that A is a group?"
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
I am not assuming that is a subset of a group. Maybe I missed the question.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:39
$begingroup$
I am not assuming that is a subset of a group. Maybe I missed the question.
$endgroup$
– pendermath
Jan 5 at 19:39
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
If $G$ is a group and $Hsubseteq G$, then $H$ is a subgroup of $G$ iff it is nonvoid and closed under multiplication and inversion. You do not need to verify all of the axioms in this case because much is inherited from $G$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If $G$ is a group and $Hsubseteq G$, then $H$ is a subgroup of $G$ iff it is nonvoid and closed under multiplication and inversion. You do not need to verify all of the axioms in this case because much is inherited from $G$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If $G$ is a group and $Hsubseteq G$, then $H$ is a subgroup of $G$ iff it is nonvoid and closed under multiplication and inversion. You do not need to verify all of the axioms in this case because much is inherited from $G$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
$endgroup$
If $G$ is a group and $Hsubseteq G$, then $H$ is a subgroup of $G$ iff it is nonvoid and closed under multiplication and inversion. You do not need to verify all of the axioms in this case because much is inherited from $G$.
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
answered Jan 5 at 14:29
ncmathsadistncmathsadist
42.6k260103
42.6k260103
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062766%2fa-subgroup-in-group-theory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
2
$begingroup$
Suppose set B is a group and A is a subset of B. If A is a subgroup, then A is also a group. So, yes.
$endgroup$
– Axion004
Jan 5 at 14:29