Misplaced Pages

Talk:Group (mathematics): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:48, 22 February 2002 editZundark (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers29,653 edits yes← Previous edit Revision as of 15:51, 25 February 2002 edit undoZundark (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers29,653 edits moved some talk hereNext edit →
Line 26: Line 26:


:Yes. The group is abelian if and only if the table is symmetric about the main diagonal. --], 2002 Feb 5 :Yes. The group is abelian if and only if the table is symmetric about the main diagonal. --], 2002 Feb 5

----

Could someone put up a good description of Sylow's Theorem?

:See ].

Also, it'd be nice to see a page dedicated to examples of groups.

Nice exercise: Classify all (isomorphism classes of) groups of order <=60. I'd like to see a page on that.

:Do you realise how complicated this is, especially for order 32? Doing order <= 15 might be feasible, however. --], 2002 Feb 22

Revision as of 15:51, 25 February 2002

We currently have two different group pages: Mathematical group and Mathematical Group. I suggest simply deleting Mathematical group and redirecting it to Mathematical Group.

Seconded, with one caveat: the title of the final article should be "Mathematical group" to comply with naming standards. --AxelBoldt

Done.
Zundark, 2001-08-11


The axiom of closure:

(Closure) for all a and b in G, a * b belong to G.

is superfluous, by definition of a binary operation. It's worth mentioning that closure follows from the definition, though.

The test of closure in the examples is in fact a test that the described mapping is inded a binary operation.

Any thoughts before I wade on in and make changes?


"This was our first example of a non-abelian group, because the operation o here is not commutative as the table shows. " If the table did show commutativity, would it be symmetrical about the diagonal from top left to bottom right? TimJ 5 Feb 2002

Yes. The group is abelian if and only if the table is symmetric about the main diagonal. --Zundark, 2002 Feb 5

Could someone put up a good description of Sylow's Theorem?

See Sylow theorems.

Also, it'd be nice to see a page dedicated to examples of groups.

Nice exercise: Classify all (isomorphism classes of) groups of order <=60. I'd like to see a page on that.

Do you realise how complicated this is, especially for order 32? Doing order <= 15 might be feasible, however. --Zundark, 2002 Feb 22