Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I think the answer is yes.

Sketch of the proof Consider $\mathbb{R}$ as a vector space over $\mathbb{Q}$. Let $\{e_\lambda:\lambda\in\Lambda\}\subset\mathbb{R}$ be its Hamel basis. Then $\{(e_{\lambda_1},e_{\lambda_2}):\lambda_1,\lambda_2\in\Lambda\}\subset\mathbb{R}^2$ is a Hamel basis of $\mathbb{R}^2$. Consider set theoretic bijection $i:\Lambda\to\Lambda\times\Lambda$ define map $\varphi:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}^2$ by its action on element of Hamel basis of $\mathbb{R}$ by equality $\varphi(e_\lambda)=(e_{i(\lambda)_1},e_{i(\lambda)_2})$. This is an isomorphism between $\mathbb{Q}$-vector spaces $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{R}^2$.

Question Could you tell me is this proof correct, and if it is not, where is the mistake?

EDIT: Thanks to GAJO we found that this proof is wrong. The correct one basis is $$ \{(e_\lambda,0):\lambda\in \Lambda\}\cup\{(0,e_\lambda):\lambda\in\Lambda\} $$ So we had to look at bijections of the form $i:\Lambda\to\Lambda\coprod\Lambda$ and the desired linear operator is defined by equalities $\varphi(e_\lambda)=(e_{i(\lambda)},0)$ if $i(\lambda)$ lies in the first copy $\Lambda$ and $\varphi(e_\lambda)=(0,e_{i(\lambda)})$ otherwise.

share|improve this question
2  
Yes, that's fine. –  Arturo Magidin May 14 '12 at 19:37
    
Looks good to me. –  Brian M. Scott May 14 '12 at 19:37
1  
Amazing community, answer after 15 second. ArturoMagidin, Brian M. Scott big thanks! –  Norbert May 14 '12 at 19:39
1  
@GEdgar, I don't care about ZF and completely accept Axiom of Choice with all its "strange" consequnces. –  Norbert May 14 '12 at 21:22
1  
@user49685: Assuming the axiom of choice, $|S\times S|=|S|$ for any infinite set $S$, so there is a bijection from $S$ to $S\times S$. One lets $\kappa=|S|$, and it’s not too hard to define an explicit bijection between the initial ordinal $\kappa$ and $\kappa\times\kappa$. Here $\Lambda$ is infinite, so there is a bijection from $\Lambda$ to $\Lambda\times\Lambda$. –  Brian M. Scott Jun 16 '13 at 17:41
show 11 more comments

1 Answer

up vote 8 down vote accepted

This was too long for a comment.

This obviously generalizes. Indeed, if $F$ is an uncountable abelian group which can be given the structure of a characteristic zero field then $F\cong F^{n}$ for any finite $n$. This is because, as you have noticed, $\dim_\mathbb{Q} F$ is necessarily infinite and thus $\dim_\mathbb{Q} F=\dim_\mathbb{Q} F^n$ so that they are isomorphic as $\mathbb{Q}$-vector spaces and thus as abelian groups.

The same argument shows that if $F$ is an infinite abelian group which can be given the structure of a characteristic $p$ field then $F\cong F^2$ as abelian groups. The same trick applies since necessarily $\dim_{\mathbb{F}_p} F$ is infinite.

Of course, both of these are really saying that if you can give the abelian group $F$ the structure of a field which is infinite dimensional over its prime subfield then it's isomorphically idempotent (as groups).

Of course, ALL OF THIS is just saying that if $F$ is a group which can be given the structure of a free $R$-module of infinite rank then it is isomorphically idempotent. So, this applies equally well to, say, $\mathbb{Q}[x]$.

That said, it's definitely not true for things like, say, $\mathbb{Q}$. Indeed, if $R$ is any integral domain then $\text{Frac}(R)\not\cong\text{Frac}(R)^n$ as $R$-modules for any finite $n$. This is because if this were true then

$$\text{Frac}(R)\otimes_R\text{Frac}(R)\cong\text{Frac}(R)\otimes_R\text{Frac}(R)^n\cong(\text{Frac}(R)\otimes_R\text{Frac}(R))^n$$

as $\text{Frac}(R)$-modules. But, I'll leave it to you to show that $\text{Frac}(R)\otimes_R\text{Frac}(R)\cong\text{Frac}(R)$ as $\text{Frac}(R)$ modules (just show it's nonzero and singly generated) from where you get (since fields have the IBN property) that $n=1$.

In fact, I think it's pretty obvious that the above generalizes to show that $\mathbb{Q}^n\not\cong\mathbb{Q}^m$ (or the more general $\text{Frac}(R)$ version) as groups for any finite $m\ne n$.

share|improve this answer
    
Sorry, I'm a newbie in algebra. What is $\mathrm{Frac}(R)$? –  Norbert May 14 '12 at 19:47
    
I'm sorry, I should have said. It means field of fractions. So, for example, $\text{Frac}(\mathbb{Z})=\mathbb{Q}$. So the above says that $\mathbb{Q}\not\cong\mathbb{Q}^n$ as groups for any finite $n$ (or obviously infinite). –  Alex Youcis May 14 '12 at 19:47
    
Thanks, Alex. I've not suspected that this can be generalized to such extent. –  Norbert May 14 '12 at 19:58
    
@ Alex , can you tell me why is $F$ isomorphic to $F^n$ and only for finite $n$ ? –  Theorem May 14 '12 at 20:21
1  
@Ananda It's actually isomorphic for any cardinal with cardinality less then $\dim_\mathbb{F_0}F$. This is because $\lambda\cdot\mu=\min\{\lambda,\mu\}$. –  Alex Youcis May 14 '12 at 20:59
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.