Math 280 Modern Algebra

Assignment 3 Solutions

1. Below is a list of binary operations ∗ on a given set. Decide if each operation is closed, associative, or
commutative. Justify your answers in each case; if an operation does not have a particular property, provide
a counterexample.

(a) ∗ on Z is defined by a ∗ b = a + b.
Solution
This is a closed operation on Z. If we add any two integers, we get another integer.
It’s also associative and commutative, both of which are properties inherited from the addition
of real numbers.

(b) ∗ on Z is defined by a ∗ b = a − b.
Solution
This is a closed operation on Z. The difference of any two integers is another integer.
It isn’t associative, however:
2 ∗ (3 ∗ 4) = 2 − (3 − 4) = 3
(2 ∗ 3) ∗ 4 = (2 − 3) − 4 = −5
nor is it a commutative operation:

2 ∗ 3 = 2 − 3 = −1 6= 1 = 3 − 2 = 3 ∗ 2

(c) ∗ on N is defined by a ∗ b = ab .
Solution
This is a closed operation on N: raising one natural number to the power of another will always
result in a natural number (remember, exponents are really just a short way of writing products,
and multiplying positive integers yields positive integers).
As the following counterexample shows, the operation is not associative:
4)
2 ∗ (3 ∗ 4) = 2(3 = 28 1

(2 ∗ 3) ∗ 4 = (23 )4 = 84 = 212
nor is it commutative:
2 ∗ 3 = 23 6= 32 = 3 ∗ 2

(d) ∗ on Z∗ (the set of nonzero integers) is defined by a ∗ b = a/b.

Solution
This is not closed: 2 ∗ 3 = 2/3 is not an integer. It is associative:

a ∗ (b ∗ c) = a/(b/c) = ac/b = (a/b)/c = (a ∗ b) ∗ c

but not commutative:

2 ∗ 3 = 2/3 6= 3/2 = 3 ∗ 2
2. Give two reasons why the set of odd integers under addition is not a group.

Solution
The operation is not closed: 3 and 5 are both odd integers, but their sum is not. In addition,
there is no identity; the additive identity in a group of real numbers is 0, but that’s not an odd
integer. The operation is associative, and there are inverses (if a is odd, so is −a), but we do
not have a group.

3. Translate each of the following multiplicative expressions into its additive counterpart. Assume that the
operation is commutative.

(a) a2 b3
Solution

Recall that a2 just means “apply the operation on a with itself.” If we’re writing that additively,
then a2 represents a + a. Similarly, b5 would be b + b + b + b + b, and so on. Replace every
product with a + sign:
a + a + b + b + b = 2a + 3b

(b) (ab2 )−3 c2 = e

Solution

−3(a + 2b) + 2c = e
4. Prove that a group G is Abelian if and only if (ab)−1 = a−1 b−1 for all a, b ∈ G.

Solution
Remember, to prove a biconditional statement, we need to prove both directions:

(⇒) Suppose G is an Abelian group with elements a and b, and let a−1 , b−1 denote the inverses
of those elements, respectively. We need to show that (ab)−1 = a−1 b−1 ; that is, we want to
show that a−1 b−1 is the inverse of ab. Since

(ab)(a−1 b−1 ) = (ba)(a−1 b−1 ) by definition of Abelian

= b(aa−1 )b−1 by associativity
−1
= b(e)b by definition of inverse
= bb−1 by definition of identity
=e by definition of inverse

and similarly

(a−1 b−1 )(ab) = (a−1 b−1 )(ba) = a−1 (b−1 b)a = a−1 (e)a = a−1 a = e

then (ab)−1 = a−1 b−1 .

(⇐) Suppose G is a group such that for all a, b ∈ G, we have (ab)−1 = a−1 b−1 . We know that in
any group, (ab)−1 = b−1 a−1 (the “shoes-and-socks” principle). If we also have (ab)−1 = a−1 b−1 ,
then
b−1 a−1 = a−1 b−1
Multiplying both sides of this equation by ab on the left, we have

abb−1 a−1 = aba−1 b−1

e = aba−1 b−1
Now multiply both sides on the right by ba:

eba = aba−1 b−1 ba

ba = ab
Since a, b were generic group elements, then G must be an Abelian group.
5. Prove that if a and b are elements of a group G, (ab)2 = a2 b2 if and only if ab = ba. (Note: Be careful with
assumptions. We cannot assume G is Abelian in either “direction”).

Solution

(⇒) Suppose G is a group such that for all a, b ∈ G, we have (ab)2 = a2 b2 . We can rewrite this
expression (carefully - remember we can’t assume elements commute) as

abab = aabb

Now, multiplying both sides on the right by b−1 and on the left by a−1 :

a−1 ababb−1 = a−1 aabbb−1

we immediately have
ba = ab
as required.

(⇐) Suppose G is a group such that for some a, b ∈ G, we have ab = ba. (Note: we cannot
assume G is Abelian, since we can’t assume ab = ba for all a, b ∈ G). Multiplying both sides on
the right by ab yields
(ab)(ab) = (ba)(ab)
(ab)2 = baab
Since we’re assuming ab = ba, we can rearrange the terms on the right:

(ab)2 = abab = aabb = a2 b2

as required.
6. A modern algebra professor meant to type a list of six integers that formed a group under multiplication mod
35. However, one of the integers was inadvertently left out, so the list appeared as

{1, 6, 11, 16, 31}

Which integer was missing from the list? Show that your completed set forms a group under multiplication
mod 35 (you may assume associativity holds).

Solution
We’ll do this the hard way first: by figuring out what number is missing by checking closure.
This means we need to check that for every a, b in the set, a ∗ b = ab mod 35 is also in the set.
However, multiplication of real numbers mod n is always commutative, so that at least eliminates
the need to check both ab and ba. Letting a ∗ b denote the product of a and b mod 35, we have:

1∗1=1
1∗6=6 6∗6=1
1 ∗ 11 = 11 6 ∗ 11 = 31 11 ∗ 11 = 16
1 ∗ 16 = 16 6 ∗ 16 = 26 11 ∗ 16 = 1 16 ∗ 16 = 11
1 ∗ 31 = 31 6 ∗ 31 = 11 11 ∗ 31 = 26 16 ∗ 31 = 6 31 ∗ 31 = 16
It looks like we have a problem with 6 ∗ 16 and 11 ∗ 31. In order to be a group, the set must
contain 26. We have to check, however, that simply including 26 in the set doesn’t cause further
problems. If a ∗ 26 is not in the set for some a, we still won’t have closure. However,

1 ∗ 26 = 26, 6 ∗ 26 = 16, 11 ∗ 26 = 6, 16 ∗ 26 = 31, 31 ∗ 26 = 1

so we really do have a closed operation on the set {1, 6, 11, 16, 26, 31}. Note that by checking
the work we’ve already done, we can see that there is an identity (1) and that each element has
an inverse:

1−1 = 1, 6−1 = 6, 11−1 = 16, 16−1 = 11, 26−1 = 31, 31−1 = 26

Associativity is inherited, so we do have a group.

There is a (slightly) easier method here. Instead of figuring out what is needed to fulfill the
closure requirement, we could have checked what we needed to fulfill the inverse requirement.
If we first tried to find the inverse of each element, we’d have seen that every element had an
inverse except 31. Then, by solving the equation

31x = 1 mod 35

(in other words, finding an x so that 31x is one more than a multiple of 35) we’d have found
the missing element right away.

Note that this group is not U (35), since that would contain all numbers that are relatively prime
to 35, such as 2, 4, and so on. The group in this problem is a subgroup of U (35).