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.

In this statement and example

The set of all nonnegative integers (including 0) under addition is not a group. There is an identity element 0, but no inverse for 2

This is my confusion. Isn't 0, under addition, an inverse for all nonnegative integers? That is

a * a' = a'*a = a + a' = a' + a

Let $a = 2$ and $a' = 0$ and then $2 + 0 = 0 + 2$

Which is also doing the identity element (does this have to be unique for a group G to be a group?)

share|improve this question
    
Yeah thank you. I overlooked that part –  sidht Oct 6 '12 at 21:50
    
This is kind of silly but when I first learned these, I viewed the inverse of an element as what I used to "kill" it, and the identity is what it became when it was "dead." Group elements, like people, are all destined for the same place - the grave - but we all get there by different methods. That's why it's the identity, but every element has its own, unique inverse. –  Alexander Gruber Oct 6 '12 at 22:01

2 Answers 2

up vote 3 down vote accepted

An inverse $b$ of $a$ is such that $ab = ba = e$ where $e$ is the identity element of the group. Can you find a positive integer $b$ such that $2+b = b+2 = 0$?

In the comment OP asked about the uniqueness of inverses. Yes, they must be unique: suppose there is another inverse $b'$ of $a$, and try to get to a contradiction.

share|improve this answer
    
Why did you set the operation to 0? –  sidht Oct 6 '12 at 21:47
    
Because 0 is the identity element. –  Mike Oct 6 '12 at 21:49
    
@jak, as I say in the first sentence, the definition of the inverse is this: "$b$ is an inverse for $a$ (both elements of a monoid) iff $ab = ba = e$, where $e$ is the identity element of the monoid". –  Andy Oct 6 '12 at 21:49
    
Oh okay, I overlooked that part. Throwing in something extra, does the inverse have to be unique? –  sidht Oct 6 '12 at 21:50

No, 0 isn't an inverse for all integers; it's the identity . Recall that the inverse $a'$ of element $a\in G$ has the property that $a+a' = a'+a=$ identity, which is in this case 0. For $a=2$, the inverse would be $-2$. Since $-2 \notin G$, $G$ isn't a group under addition.

The property you showed : $2+0=0+2=2$, illustrates that 0 is the identity element, not the inverse of 2. Hope this helps.

share|improve this answer

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.