MATH 410 - ABSTRACT ALGEBRA DISCUSSIONS - WEEK 1

CAN OZAN OGUZ

1. Overview
In this introduction course to abstract algebra, we will see many examples of
algebraic structures such as groups, rings, fields, vector spaces, algebras...etc.
All of these structures are basically sets with extra properties.
Example You might remember from linear algebra the definition of a vector space
V over a field F :
Definition A vector space V over a field F is a set V containing 0, equipped
• with an operation
F ×V →V
(c, v) → c.v
called scaler product
• with an operation
V ×V →V
(v1 , v2 ) → v1 + v2
called vector addition
satisfying certain properties such as 0.v = 0 for all v ∈ V ,...etc.
Now a vector space has quite an involved definition. Fortunately for us, we will
focus our attention on a much simpler algebraic structure, which is called a group.
As you can guess, this will be a set G with some extra properties.
Definition A group (G, ∗) is a set G with a binary opreation ∗ : G × G → G such
that
• There is an element e ∈ G satisfying e ∗ g = g for all g ∈ G, called identity
element
• For every g ∈ G, there exists an element g −1 such that g −1 ∗ g = e, called
inverse of g
• The operation ∗ is associative(i.e g ∗ (h ∗ k) = (g ∗ h) ∗ k for all g, h, k ∈ G)
The three properties required from a group are abstractions of crucial properties
of daily mathematical objects such as the integers Z, real numbers R, n-dimensional
real space Rn ...etc.
It is often the case that people use mathematics to solve real world problems.
Abstract algebra aims to work with and understand purely mathematical objects. It
develops new mathematical tools to achieve this goal. Nevertheless, people always
find a way to apply these ideas to real world problems eventually.

Date: August 23rd, 2017.

1
2 CAN OZAN OGUZ

History of mathematics is full of such examples. When Sophus Lie(1842-1899)

came up with his famous Lie groups, he was following his intellectual curiosity. In
21st century, it is not possible to do physics without Lie groups.
Similarly with the invention of computers, people got concerned about electronic
security. Todays most commonly used cryptography method RSA is based on an
application of group theory to integers. This method is used whenever you use your
credit card, make an online transaction, send a mail, text a friend...etc.

2. Proof Techniques
We will be spending our first few weeks by working with natural numbers N and
integers Z, which will provide a rich background for our abstract group theory later
on. One difficulty we will encounter is that we would like to say true statements
which will hold for any natural number n ∈ N and there are infinitely many of those.
To prove that our statements are correct, we cannot check them for all integers one
by one. Hence we will use an alternate approach and we will check for all natural
numbers at once.
Proof by Induction relies on the simple property of N: Natural numbers has a
starting point, 0, and every natural number is followed by a unique one(i.e n is
followed by n+1). Therefore to prove a statement S(n) for all n ∈ N, it is enough
to prove that
• Base case: S(0) is true
• Inductive step: If S(N ) is true for some N , then S(N + 1) is also true.
From these two steps, we obtain a domino effect: S(0) is true by base case,
and S(1) is true by inductive step simply by taking N=0. But if S(1) is true, by
inductive step, S(2) must be true as well, and S(3), S(4), S(5)... they all follow
since they are all lined up one after the other as dominos. Therefore, we show by
induction that S(n) is true for all n ∈ N.
Remark We need both steps in a proof by induction.
If our statement S(n) is ”n2 = n”, the base step will be true, but there is no
way we can show the inductive step.
Similarly if our statement S(n) is ”n = n + 1”, inductive step is easy to show by
adding one to both sides, however the base step is not true.
We really need both of these steps together.
Induction is especially strong if your statement is a formula. We may not have
an understanding as to why such a formula holds, but we can easily prove it by
induction.
Example Let’s show that for n ≥ 1, 2 + 22 + 23 + · · · + 2n = 2n+1 − 2.
• Base step: For n = 1, we get 2 = 22 − 2 = 2, so the base case is true.
• Inductive step: Suppose the formula is true for some N ≥ 1, that is
2 + 22 + · · · + 2N = 2N +1 − 2
Now we want to show that the formula holds for N + 1 as well.
(2 + 22 + · · · + 2N ) + 2N +1 = (2N +1 − 2) + 2N +1
= (2N +1 + 2N +1 ) − 2
= 2N +2 − 2
which completes the inductive step.
 MATH 410 - ABSTRACT ALGEBRA DISCUSSIONS - WEEK 1 3

Therefore, we conclude that 2 + 22 + 23 + · · · + 2n = 2n+1 − 2 is true for all n ≥ 1.

So far proof by induction seems very innocent.However, as a mathematician, you
should always be cautious with your arguments. Consider the following example.
Example We will prove that ”All horses are of the same color” by induction.
• Base step: If there is only a single horse, of course all they are all of the
same color.
• Inductive step: Suppose any set of N horses have the same color. We
would like to show that then any N + 1 horses are of the same color. To
achieve this, consider a collection of N +1 horses, and lets enumerate them:
{H1 , H2 , · · · , HN +1 }.
If we look at the first N horses {H1 , H2 , · · · , HN }, then they are all
of the same color by our inductive hypothesis. Similarly consider the last
N horses {H2 , H3 , · · · , HN +1 }. They also must be all of the same color,
maybe a different color that the first set, by inductive hypothesis. And
notice that these two sets have common elements, meaning some horses are
in both of these sets. Therefore these two sets of horses must have the same
color. This concludes our inductive step.
By induction, we proved that all horses are of the same color, which I personally
know from experience is simply not true. What went wrong in our inductive proof?
After careful examination, you can see that the claim ”these two sets have com-
mon elements” doesn’t hold for N = 2, since the sets {H1 } and {H2 } are disjoint,
and this ruins our domino effect. So our reasoning in the inductive step was flawed.
After an introduction to this powerful proof technique, lets put it to good use
and lets prove an important and useful statement:
Example We want to prove the binomial theorem
n  
n
X n k
(1 + x) = x
k
k=0
0    
0
X 0 k 0 0
• Base step: For n = 0, we get (1 + x) = 1 = x = x which
k 0
  k=0
0
is true since = 1.
0
• Inductive step: Suppose the formula is true for some N ∈ N, that is
N  
N
X N k
(1 + x) = x
k
k=0
Now
N  
X N
(1 + x)N +1 = (1 + x)N (1 + x) = ( xk )(1 + x)
k
k=0
N   N  
X N k
X N
=( x )+( xk+1 )
k k
k=0 k=0

We will play with indices in order to combine the two sums and obtain
N +1  
X N +1 k
( x ) as follows:
k
k=0
4 CAN OZAN OGUZ

N   N +1   N  
X N k+1
X N k
X N
(1) x = x =( xk ) + xN +1
k k−1 k−1
k=0 k=1 k=1
where first we shifted the index by one, then we took out the last term. For
the remaining sum, we have
N   N  
X N k X N k
x =1+( x )
k k
k=0 k=1
where we just took out the first term.
Now our sums start and end at the same index, and the exponents of x
within the sums are the same, so we can combine them to get

N    
N +1
X N N
(2) (1 + x) =1+( + xk ) + xN +1
k k−1
k=1
   
N N
It is a classic combinatorial exercise to prove that + =
    k k−1
N +1 N N!
, or you can use the fact that = , however none
k k  −k)!
k!(N
N
of this is necessary and a simple interpretation of as the coefficient
k
of xk in (1 + x)N and coefficient chasing in Pascal’s triangle is enough to
show this equality.
Finally by combining the terms in 1, we obtain
N +1  
N +1
X N +1 k
(1 + x) = x
k
k=0
completing the inductive step.
Hence by induction, Binomial theorem is true for all n ∈ N.