I have completed a proof of this that I am inclined to believe is correct, or at least on the right track. I would like to ask if it is indeed correct, or if I need a nudge in the right direction. Perhaps there is a better way to go about this?

My Proof:

(1) I will show that the existence of a generator for an infinite cyclic group implies the existence of a second which is the inverse of the former.

If $G$ is an infinite cyclic group, then every element of $G$ can be written as $a^n$ for $n\in\mathbb{Z}$ and $a$ some element of $G$. It is clear, then, that $a^{-1}$ and $a$ are both generators for $G$ since, given $n\in\mathbb{Z}$, we can choose $m\in\mathbb{Z}$ such that $(a^{-1})^n=(a)^m$ by taking $m=-n$. Moreover, we are guaranteed that $a^{-1}\ne a$ since this would imply $a=a^{-1}=e_G$ leaving us with $G$ the trivial group. So given one generator, there must be another, namely, the inverse of the given generator.

(2) Now I will show that $G$ cannot have more than two generators.

Now suppose for the sake of contradiction that $n>2$ and $G=\langle{a_1}\rangle=\ldots=\langle{a_n}\rangle$ (which is to say that any one of these $n$ elements and its inverses generate $G$), where $a_i=a_j\iff i=j$. Then, by invoking the pigeonhole principle, at least one of the members of $\{a_1,\ldots,a_n\}$ is not an inverse of one of the others. Let us call this element $a_i\ne a_1,a_{1}^{-1}$. Thus, if $a_1$ generates $G$, then there exists $b\in\mathbb{Z}$ for which $a_{1}^{b}=a_i$. Hence, if these both generate $G$, then $\forall{c\in\mathbb{Z}},\exists{j\in\mathbb{Z}}$ such that $a_{1}^{c}=a_{i}^{j}$, but $a_{i}=a_{1}^{b}$, so $a_{1}^{c}=a_{1}^{bj}$. But if $b\ne{\pm1}$, this is cannot be true, as this would state (for $c=b-1$) that $b-1=bj\implies j=1-\frac{1}{b}$ and then both $j$ and $\frac{1}{b}$ cannot be an integer for any value other than $b=\pm{1}$, which contradicts the assumption that $a_{i}$ is neither the inverse of $a_{1}$ nor equal to $a_1$.

Combining statements (1) and (2),it follows that if $G$ has one generator and it is an infinite cyclic group, then this generator is not the identity element and $G$ must have two generators. Additionally, if $G$ is an infinite cyclic group, it cannot have $n>2$ generators. These two statements mean that $G$ must have precisely two generators.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A bit wordy, but correct. $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Dec 20 '14 at 20:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ if a cyclic group $G$ (finite or infinite) is generated by an element $x \in G$, then $x^{-1}$ is also a generator of $G$. so the assumption that $G$ is infinite in (1) is not necessary. $\endgroup$ – Krish Dec 20 '14 at 20:27

You can simplify it greatly, and also do part (2) without contradiction (i.e. directly).

(1) If $G = \langle a \rangle$, then $G$ also equals $\langle a^{-1} \rangle$, because every element $a^n$ of $\langle a \rangle$ is also equal to $(a^{-1})^{-n}$.

(2) If $G = \langle a \rangle = \langle b \rangle$, then $b = a^n$ for some integer $n$, and $a = b^m$ for some integer $m$. These imply that $a = b^m = (a^n)^m = a^{nm}$; since $G$ is infinite cyclic, $nm$ must equal $1$. As an equation in the integers, $nm = 1$ has only two solutions, $(1,1)$ and $(-1,-1)$. These give $b = a$ or $b = a^{-1}$.

  • $\begingroup$ That's a much cleaner way to go about in part (2), thanks! $\endgroup$ – Nobody Dec 21 '14 at 23:00

Important note: $a=a^{-1}\not\rightarrow a=\epsilon$

$a=a^{-1}\rightarrow order (a) = 2$

There are many counter-examples to this, for example all the 2-cycles in the symmetric group. However in the above scenario we are guaranteed that $a\not=a^{-1} \rightarrow \mathbf{G}$ is not infinite cyclic which is a contradiction.


One can simply use isomorphisms.We can apply the fact that any infinite cyclic group say G is isomorphic to Z. Now ,any isomorphism maps a generator(of the domain group) to a generator of the co domain group,since Z has precisely 2 generators this implies G has also 2 generators

PS: I concede that this is not the best solution as isomorphisms have been used ,instead of concept of cyclic groups only


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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