Let's say you have a group $(G,\cdot)$ and you have a normal subgroup $N$ (note we are considering this only as a set). And now we want to define a binary operation $\star$ on $G/N$ such that $(G/N, \star)$ is a group. Every element of $G/N$ looks like $aN$ for some $a\in G$. Thus it seems perfectly natural to want to exploit the group-theoretic structure of the elements of the cosets and define $aN\star bN:= a\cdot bN$.

Most textbooks do this and then they quickly turn around and prove this operation is well-defined. I understand all of this and why they do it, but doesn't this construct pre-suppose a choice function on $G/N$?

It seems to me that the definition of the binary operation $\star$ is a quick abbreviation of all of this: let $f$ be a choice function for $G/N$. Then for all $A$ and $B$ in $G/N$ define $A\star B:= (f(A)\cdot f(B))N$. And the usual well-defined check follows up to show that this operation does not depend on the choice-function $f$, shows that this operation is associative, and has an identity.

But the independence of the choice-function does not excuse the need for the existence of a choice function. And we are not always guaranteed a choice function (in AC's absence). It bothers that we appear to need an extremely strong principle for something so fundamental but trivial in Group Theory. (Of course, there is a similar problem with rings and ideals in Ring Theory)

I have a couple questions. Is my supposition correct? That is, in the usual construction of the quotient operation, is there an assumption of a choice-function? If that is the case, could we---at the cost of being long-winded and perhaps tedious---define a quotient operation that does not presuppose a choice function?


You can avoid the choice function altogether by defining $A\cdot B=\{\,ab\mid a\in A, b\in B\,\}$ where $A,B$ are subsets of $G$ that happen to be of the form $aN=\{\,an\mid n\in N\,\}$ for some $a\in G$, but we really just use Replacement here, no choice.

To see all the settheoretic details for defining $G/N$ and verify that Choice is not invoked, use Powerset and Comprehension (and lesser sins) to define $$G/N:=\{\,A\in\mathcal P(G)\mid A\ne\emptyset, \forall a,b\in A\colon a^{-1}b\in N\,\}$$ and Replacement as above or Comprehension as in $$ A\cdot B:=\{\,g\in G\mid \exists a\in A, b\in B\colon g=ab\,\}$$ for multiplication.


If you wanted to make a single once-for-all selection of coset representatives, then, in general, you would need to use the axiom of choice to create a choice function. However, when defining the product in $G/N$, you just need to pick representatives for two cosets at a time. You can forget about the representatives once you've computed the product of the cosets. That is, suppose we pick two cosets $A$ and $B$. We then define $C$ to be the unique coset in $G/N$ such that whenever $A = aN$ and $B = bN$, then $C = (ab)N$. We can prove the existence and uniqueness of such a $C$ without appealing to the axiom of choice. Finally, we define the product on $G/N$ by declaring, for any cosets $A$ and $B$, that $AB$ is the coset $C$ determined as above.


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.