I am trying to prove that every Finite Generated Abelian Torsion-Free Group is a Free Abelian Group. In order to do this, I am trying to show that if $\{x_1, \dots, x_n\}$ is a minimal generator of the group and if $n_1x_1 + \dots n_n x_n=0$ then $n_1=\dots = n_n=0$. I'm stuck here.
-
2Do you know the structure theorem for finitely generated abelian groups? – David C. Ullrich Aug 16 '15 at 19:29
-
No, I don't :( is there a way to avoid it? – Aug 16 '15 at 19:36
-
7This question seems prior to the structure theorem to me. – Mark Bennet Aug 16 '15 at 19:39
-
1@MarkBennet Yeah, that's why I asked - if he doesn't know it then it's later in the book... So tell me. I can do the case $n=2$ (just noticed problems with the OP's notation; presumably you know what I mean by $n=2$). Like so: If $m_1$ and $m_2$ are relatively prime then there exist $a_1$ and $a_2$ such that... and hence $(m_1,m_2)$ is the first column of an invertible $\Bbb Z$-valued matrix, hence his relation implies that the group actually has a single generator. Is it true that if $m_1,\dots m_n$ have no common factor then $m$ is the first column of some invertible integer matrix? Easy? – David C. Ullrich Aug 16 '15 at 20:07
-
@MarkBennet Erm, "invertible $\Bbb Z$-valued matrix" is of course not exactly what I meant. Meant element of $SL_n(\Bbb Z)$. – David C. Ullrich Aug 16 '15 at 20:19
-
3Vinicius, if this were a vector space you would know what to do, right? You would solve one of the $x_i$s from the dependency relation and show that it is not needed as a generator. Here we cannot do that unless one of the coefficients is $\pm1$. Which brings us to my answer of altering the generating set so as to make the coefficients smaller and smaller... – Jyrki Lahtonen Aug 16 '15 at 20:22
-
@MarkBennet Not that you were minding, but never mind, I proved it. – David C. Ullrich Aug 17 '15 at 13:37
-
@DavidC.Ullrich I was just trying to clarify things, as the structure theorem contains this result rather trivially, but without the result here you can't really get the full structure theorem. Adapting linear algebra techniques does it. – Mark Bennet Aug 17 '15 at 13:53
-
@MarkBennet Right - I understood that. Realized later yesterday that the result in question is more or less the structure theorem in the torsion-free case. Which means using the structure theorem is ok or not, depending on whether we're leading up to a proof of the theorem or giving a trivial exercise to see if we know the theorem. Yes, adapting linear algebra techniques does it - that's what I did last night. – David C. Ullrich Aug 17 '15 at 14:08
4 Answers
Presumably you don't have the structure theorem in your bag of tools. Then you can proceed as follows. If the coefficients $n_1,n_2,\ldots,n_n$ have a common factor, say $d$, you can cancel that from the equation, because otherwise $(n_1/d)x_1+(n_2/d)x_2+\cdots+(n_n/d)x_n$ would be a non-zero torsion element.
The idea is that if $\{x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n\}$ is a minimal generating set, then so is the set gotten from this by replacing $x_i$ with $x_i'=x_i+ax_j$ for some $j\neq i$ and integer $a$ (prove this as an exercise if you don't see it right away). Furthermore, the putative linear dependency relation can then be rewritten to read $$ n_1x_1+\cdots+n_ix_i'+\cdots+(n_j-a n_i)x_j+\cdots +n_nx_n=0. $$ Basically this allows us to run Euclid's algorithm on the set of coefficients - always select $a$ in such a way that the altered coefficient $n_j-an_i$ becomes as small as possible (in absolute value). Rinse. Repeat. Because we earlier saw that the no-torsion requirement implies that $\gcd(n_1,n_2,\ldots,n_n)=1$, we eventually get a linear dependency relation, where one of the coefficients is $=\pm1$. This means that one of the generators can then be written as a $\Bbb{Z}$-linear combination of the others and thus disposed of as a generator - in violation of the minimality of the generating set you started with.
- 140,891
-
-
What do you mean by 'minimal'? Is $X$ a minimal generating set of $G$ if $X$ has no proper subset which generates $G$? Or you mean just the $\mathbb Z$-linear independence? – Springfield Apr 07 '21 at 10:32
-
Oh, it seems the first one is the thing. Then what can I do with the generating set ${2,, 3}$ of $\mathbb Z$? I think it is minimal because $\mathbb Z$ cannot be generated by $2$ or $3$ alone. But the set ${2,,3-2 }$ obtained by your way can discard $3$. Did I miss something? – Springfield Apr 07 '21 at 10:44
-
That's the idea. After replacing ${2,3}$ with ${2,3-2}={2,1}$ you can throw away $2$ et cetera. – Jyrki Lahtonen Apr 07 '21 at 11:40
-
If ${x_1,..., x_n}$ is a minimal generating set (in the sense that removing any one element from this set leaves us with a set that does not generate the whole group), then it is not necessary that replacing some $x_i$ with $x_i ' = x_i-ax_j$ for some integers $a$ and $j \neq i$ gives another minimal generating set. As pointed out in the above comments, ${2,3}$ is a minimal generating set of $\mathbb{Z}$ but ${2, 3-2} = {2,1}$ is not a minimal generating set of $\mathbb{Z}$ since ${1}$ generates $\mathbb{Z}$. – Avyaktha Achar Sep 21 '24 at 09:35
-
But the proof can be fixed by taking ${x_1,...,x_n}$ to be a generating set of smallest possible size. In that case, the set obtained by replacing some $x_i$ with $x_i ' = x_i - ax_j$ for some integer $a$ and some $j \neq i$, which is a generating set in general, will also be a minimal generating set, as a set of smaller size cannot be a generating set. – Avyaktha Achar Sep 21 '24 at 09:44
-
I think that the way I described the process of sequentially modifying the generating set makes it plain that in the context of this answer minimaL means the same thing as lowest possible number of elements as opposed to the other common meaning you described. Anyway, the OP seems to have interpreted it that way. – Jyrki Lahtonen Sep 21 '24 at 10:51
It follows directly from the structure theorem, see under "corollaries": "A corollary to the structure theorem is that every finitely generated torsion-free abelian group is free abelian". The torsionfree group $\mathbb{Z}^n$ is free-abelian of rank $n$.
- 140,055
Let $M$ be such a group. By the structure theorem of modules over $\mathbb{Z}$, we can find $r \geq 0$ and $a_{1} | a_{2}| \cdots |a_{t}$ (non zero positive integers) such that $M \cong \mathbb{Z}^{r} \times \mathbb{Z}/a_{1}\mathbb{Z}\times \mathbb{Z}/a_{2}\mathbb{Z} \times \cdots \times \mathbb{Z}/a_{t}\mathbb{Z}$. Now since $M$ is torsion-free, the $a_{i}$ are 1, so $M \cong \mathbb{Z}^{r}$
- 19,173
- 8,935
Woo-hoo! Here's the proof (without the structure theorem) that I was trying for yesterday.
Notation: If $w=(w_1,\dots,w_n)\in\Bbb Z^n$ we will write $$\gcd(w)=\gcd(w_1,\dots,w_n).$$ If $x_1,\dots,x_n$ is your minimal generating set we will write $$x=(x_1,\dots,x_n).$$The reason being that now if $w\in\Bbb Z^n$ we will want to write $$w\cdot x=w_1x_1+\dots+w_nx_n$$in order to make various things readable.
Here's the theorem I conjectured yesterday (based on the case $n=2$):
Theorem Suppose $m\in\Bbb Z^n$ and $\gcd(m)=1$. There exists a set $v_1,\dots, v_n$ of generators for $\Bbb Z^n$ with $m=v_1$.
You can find a proof of that at Generating Sets for Subgroups of $(\Bbb Z^n,+)$.. The theorem makes the result you want trivial:
Suppose $x_1,\dots,x_n$ is a minimal set of generators for your torsion-free abelian group. Suppose that there exists $m\in\Bbb Z^n$ with $m\ne0$ and $$m\cdot x=0.$$ (See above for the notation.)
As noted previously, if there exist $d\in\Bbb Z$ and $m'\in\Bbb Z^n$ with $m=dm'$ then $d(m'\cdot x)=0$ and hence $m'\cdot x=0$. So we may assume $\gcd(m)=1$. Let $v_1,\dots,v_n$ be a set of generators for $\Bbb Z^n$ with $v_1=m$.
Now if $w\in\Bbb Z^n$ there exist integers $k_j$ with $$w=k_1m+k_2v_2+\dots+k_nv_n.$$Hence $$w\cdot x=k_2(v_2\cdot x)+\dots+k_n(v_n\cdot x).$$So $v_2\cdot x,\dots,v_n\cdot x$ generate your group, contradicting the minimality of $m$.
- 92,839