4

Hi I am working on following hw problem and I want to make sure that I am doing this correctly? I think I am going about this in the right way but I still need some reassurance.

Let $G$ be a group and for a fixed element $a \in G$ define a map $\lambda_a:G \rightarrow G$ by $\lambda_a(x) = ax.$ To prove that $\lambda_a$ is a permutation of $G$ we must show that $\lambda_a$ is a bijective mapping from $G \rightarrow G$. To show that $\lambda_a$ is injective let $x_1,x_2 \in G$ and let $a \in G$ be fixed. Suppose that $\lambda_a(x_1) = \lambda_a(x_2)$ since $a \in G$ and since $G$ is a group then $a^{-1} \in G$. Then $ax_1 = ax_2$ and, $$ x_1 = a^{-1}ax_1 = a^{-1}ax_2 = x_2$$ Therefore $\lambda_a$ is injective. Next to show that $\lambda_a$ is surjective let $x \in G$, then $\lambda_a$ is surjective if for all $x \in G$, there exists an $x \in G$ such that $\lambda_a(x) = ax$. Thus $\lambda_a$ is both injective and surjective and is therefore a bijective mapping from $G \rightarrow G$.

spitfiredd
  • 637
  • 2
  • 10
  • 18

2 Answers2

4

Injectivity is fine, but you just state the definition of surjectivity without proving anything. To show that $\lambda_a$ is surjective, you should fix an $x \in G$ and find an element $g \in G$ such that $\lambda_a(g) = x$; manipulating the definition, this strongly suggests that you look at

$$g = a^{-1} x$$

2

Your injective proof is perfect. You still need to show surjectivity. Also note that, if $G$ is finite, then you are done since $\lambda_a$ takes $G$ to itself, so any injective map is surjective and vice versa.

Surjectivity is pretty simple though. Consider some $g \in G$. Does there exist an $x \in G$ such that $\lambda_a(x) = g$? Well, noting that $\lambda_a(x) = ax$, simply take $x = a^{-1}g$.

Kaj Hansen
  • 33,011