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.

Can you check next statements, and they are proofs?

Statement 1. Lets $A, A_1, A_2$ - are abelian groups and $$A = A_1\oplus A_2.$$ Then $$A/A_1=A_2.$$ Proof: $$A=\{(a_1, a_2)|a_1\in A_1,~~a_2\in A_2\}.$$ $$x = (x_1, x_2)\sim y = (y_1, y_2)\Leftrightarrow x-y\in A_1 \Leftrightarrow x_2=y_2.$$ So, homomorphism $\varphi : A/A_1\to A_2$, such that $$\varphi(a_1, a_2) = a_2,$$ is isomorphism. $\blacksquare$

Statement 2. Lets $A\supset B$ - abelian, then $$A = B\oplus A/B$$

Proof: $A\supset B$, therefore $$\exists C\subset A: A=B\oplus C.$$ And from first statement: $$C = A/B.$$ $\blacksquare$

Thanks.

share|improve this question
3  
It's a bad sign in a proof when you have a statement with no attempt to justify it. Why does $A \supset B$ imply the existence of a $C$ such that $A=B \oplus C$? –  Chris Eagle Nov 23 '11 at 18:19
    
It should be true, at least for finitely generated abelian groups, that any quotient will appear as a subgroup. But Prof Magidin's example shows that you can't expect this to give a direct sum decomposition. –  Dylan Moreland Nov 23 '11 at 18:57
    
(2⊕4)/(1⊕2) ≅ 2⊕2 ≠ 4, so you have to make sure to use the right copy of A1 in A. –  Jack Schmidt Nov 23 '11 at 20:43

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

First statement: you don't have equality between $A/A_1$ and $A_2$, you have isomorphism.

The second statement: you cannot hope for equality in general, though you may hope for isomorphism. However, Statement 2 is false: take $A$ to be cyclic of order $4$, $B$ to be the unique cyclic subgroup of order $2$. Then $A/B$ is cyclic of order $2$, so your assertion is that the cyclic group of order $4$ (namely, $A$) is isomorphic to a direct sum of a cyclic group of order $2$ (namely $B$) and another cyclic group of order $2$ (namely, $A/B$). This is false.

The error lies in the assertion that there must exist a $C$ contained in $A$ such that $A=B\oplus C$. There is no warrant for this assertion, as you can see with the example above.

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.