
Linear Algebra Linear Algebra Math Forum 
 LinkBack  Thread Tools  Display Modes 
November 17th, 2018, 11:52 AM  #1 
Newbie Joined: Nov 2018 From: France Posts: 8 Thanks: 0  Prove elementary rules in a field
Hey. Given the field F, Prove: * For any a, b in F, if a*a=b*b, then a=b or a=b * For any a, b in F, if a*a*a = b*b*b, then a=b Given the field F where 1+1=0, Prove: * For any a in F, a=a * For any a, b in F, a+b=ab The proofs have to be supported by the axioms of fields rigorously. I don't know actually how even start proving it. Thanks. 
November 17th, 2018, 01:46 PM  #2 
Senior Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 2,259 Thanks: 682 
What have you tried on the first one, if if a*a=b*b, then a=b or a=b? Can you see any obvious algebraic manipulations that will solve the problem?

November 17th, 2018, 01:48 PM  #3 
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,469 Thanks: 2038 
If you can't make a good start, consider what you can prove by use of the axioms.

November 17th, 2018, 08:10 PM  #4 
Newbie Joined: Nov 2018 From: France Posts: 8 Thanks: 0 
Maybe I can start by assuming a=b? And by transitivity we can get that a*a=b*b?

November 20th, 2018, 06:32 AM  #5  
Senior Member Joined: Aug 2017 From: United Kingdom Posts: 311 Thanks: 109 Math Focus: Number Theory, Algebraic Geometry  Quote:
More precisely, fix elements a and b in your field F. Let A be the statement "a*a=b*b", B be the statement "a=b" and C be the statement "a=b". You've been asked to show A $\implies$ B or C, but you've instead shown B $\implies$ A. What you should instead do is assume A is true (that is, assume a*a=b*b), and then deduce that B or C is true (that is, that a=b or a=b). (Or, equivalently, you could assume that the statement "B or C" is false, and then deduce that A is false. This works as P $\implies$ Q is equivalent to not(Q) $\implies$ not(P).) ____________________________________ Here are some slightly less involved "prove from the axioms" questions, to help you get used to this style of problem. These results will also be useful in answering the first question you've posted. (1) A field axiom tells you that F has an element 0 (an "additive identity") such that a + 0 = a for all a in F. Prove that 0 is the only additive identity in F. In other words, show: if x is an element of F such that a + x = a for all a in F, then x = 0. Similarly, an axiom says F has a "multiplicative identity" 1. (That is, a*1 = a for all a in F). Prove 1 is the only multiplicative identity of F. (2) Another field axiom says, for any c in F, there exists an element d in F (an "additive inverse" of c) such that c + d = 0. Prove that d is the only additive inverse of c in F. In other words, show: if e is an element of F such that c + e = 0, then e = d. Due to this exercise, we can talk of "the" additive inverse of c, rather than just "an" additive inverse of c. From now on, we will denote the additive inverse of c by c. (3) Prove that x*0 = 0 for all x in F. (4) Suppose x and y are elements of F. Prove that, if x*y = 0, then x = 0 or y = 0. (5) Suppose x and y are elements of F. Prove that (x*y) = (x)*y = x*(y) = (1)*x*y. _______________________________ For what it's worth, the second implication you've posted (that a*a*a = b*b*b implies a=b) isn't true in general. For example, take F to be the field of complex numbers. Then if $a = e^{\frac{2\pi i}{3}}$ and $b = 1$, we have $a * a * a = e^{2\pi i} = 1 = b * b * b$, but $a \neq b$. In a general field F, we only have the implication: a*a*a = b*b*b implies a = w*b, where w is a cuberoot of unity in F. (When I say w is a cuberoot of unity, I mean w*w*w = 1.)  

Tags 
elementary, field, prove, rules 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Is trying to prove Fermat's last theorem by an elementary technique pointless?  mathsman1  Math  11  January 4th, 2016 07:39 AM 
Q[√2,√4], prove that is a field  tawi  Linear Algebra  6  November 23rd, 2015 05:26 AM 
rules of deduction to prove sequent  kp100591  Applied Math  0  April 13th, 2014 10:57 PM 
Elementary Field Question  gwsinger  Real Analysis  7  August 11th, 2011 01:43 PM 
elementary electric field.  supermikong  Calculus  0  August 15th, 2010 11:40 PM 