Difference between “generating set” and free product?












5












$begingroup$


Let $G$ and $H$ be free groups and $g in G$. Is there a difference between $langle H, Grangle$ and the free product $H*G$?. In particular is $langle H ,g rangle = H * langle g rangle$?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Take $H=G=Bbb Z$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dietrich Burde
    1 hour ago
















5












$begingroup$


Let $G$ and $H$ be free groups and $g in G$. Is there a difference between $langle H, Grangle$ and the free product $H*G$?. In particular is $langle H ,g rangle = H * langle g rangle$?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Take $H=G=Bbb Z$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dietrich Burde
    1 hour ago














5












5








5





$begingroup$


Let $G$ and $H$ be free groups and $g in G$. Is there a difference between $langle H, Grangle$ and the free product $H*G$?. In particular is $langle H ,g rangle = H * langle g rangle$?










share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




Let $G$ and $H$ be free groups and $g in G$. Is there a difference between $langle H, Grangle$ and the free product $H*G$?. In particular is $langle H ,g rangle = H * langle g rangle$?







group-theory free-groups free-product






share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question






New contributor




user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 hours ago









user47370user47370

283




283




New contributor




user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






user47370 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Take $H=G=Bbb Z$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dietrich Burde
    1 hour ago














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Take $H=G=Bbb Z$.
    $endgroup$
    – Dietrich Burde
    1 hour ago








1




1




$begingroup$
Take $H=G=Bbb Z$.
$endgroup$
– Dietrich Burde
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
Take $H=G=Bbb Z$.
$endgroup$
– Dietrich Burde
1 hour ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

In general, yes there is a difference between these two groups. For instance, consider the subgroups $2mathbf Z$ and $3mathbf Z$. Then we have $langle 2mathbf Z , 3mathbf Zrangle = mathbf Z$, but $2mathbf Zast3mathbf Z = 2mathbf Zastlangle 3ranglecongmathbf Zastmathbf Z$ is not an abelian group, since we do not impose any commutation relations between elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $2mathbf Z$ and the elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $3mathbf Z$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    thank you. That makes sense. In case $H$ is finitely generated and $gnotin H$ is it then true that $langle H,g rangle = H*langle grangle$?
    $endgroup$
    – user47370
    1 hour ago








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @user47370 If I may, let me try to give a counterexample. Take $A$ an abelian group, $H$ a f.g subgroup of $A$ and $gin A$ but $gnotin H$. Then $langle H,grangle$ is abelian but $H*langle grangle$ is not
    $endgroup$
    – giannispapav
    1 hour ago





















3












$begingroup$

As @Dietrich Burde suggests you can take $H=G=$(any free group $F_n,nge1$) and then $langle G,Hrangle=H=G$ and $H*G$ is not isomorphic to $H$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    Since none of these points are in the answers above, although they answer your question, I'd like to add some comments. I won't add a new counterexample, since the other answers already cover that, just add a more abstract viewpoint.



    First of all, there is an essential difference between $langle G,Hrangle$ and $G*H$, namely $langle G,Hrangle$ presupposes that $G$ and $H$ are embedded in some larger group, which I'll call $K$, whereas the free product does not. The group operation on $K$ may impose relations on $G$ and $H$ that are not present in the free product (which has no relations between the elements of $G$ and the elements of $H$).



    What this means concretely is that if we consider the homomorphism $phi:G*Hto K$ given by the universal property of the free product, its image is $langle G,Hrangle$, and its kernel tells us whether or not $G*H$ and $langle G,Hrangle$ are isomorphic (technically this only tells us if they're naturally isomorphic, but let's ignore that tangent).



    The elements of the kernel of $phi$ will be the relations between elements of $G$ and $H$ imposed by the group operation on $K$.



    If we look at giannispapav/Dietrich Burde's counterexamples, if we let $K=G=H=F_n$ be free groups, then $langle G,Hrangle =K$, and $G*H=F_{2n}$, and the map sends the word $g_1h_1g_2h_2cdots g_nh_n$ in $G*H$ to the result of evaluating this product in $K$.



    The relations are $g_Gg^{-1}_H=1$, where $g_G$ is an element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $G$, $g^{-1}_H$ is the inverse of the same element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $H$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });






      user47370 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3186562%2fdifference-between-generating-set-and-free-product%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      4












      $begingroup$

      In general, yes there is a difference between these two groups. For instance, consider the subgroups $2mathbf Z$ and $3mathbf Z$. Then we have $langle 2mathbf Z , 3mathbf Zrangle = mathbf Z$, but $2mathbf Zast3mathbf Z = 2mathbf Zastlangle 3ranglecongmathbf Zastmathbf Z$ is not an abelian group, since we do not impose any commutation relations between elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $2mathbf Z$ and the elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $3mathbf Z$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        thank you. That makes sense. In case $H$ is finitely generated and $gnotin H$ is it then true that $langle H,g rangle = H*langle grangle$?
        $endgroup$
        – user47370
        1 hour ago








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @user47370 If I may, let me try to give a counterexample. Take $A$ an abelian group, $H$ a f.g subgroup of $A$ and $gin A$ but $gnotin H$. Then $langle H,grangle$ is abelian but $H*langle grangle$ is not
        $endgroup$
        – giannispapav
        1 hour ago


















      4












      $begingroup$

      In general, yes there is a difference between these two groups. For instance, consider the subgroups $2mathbf Z$ and $3mathbf Z$. Then we have $langle 2mathbf Z , 3mathbf Zrangle = mathbf Z$, but $2mathbf Zast3mathbf Z = 2mathbf Zastlangle 3ranglecongmathbf Zastmathbf Z$ is not an abelian group, since we do not impose any commutation relations between elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $2mathbf Z$ and the elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $3mathbf Z$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        thank you. That makes sense. In case $H$ is finitely generated and $gnotin H$ is it then true that $langle H,g rangle = H*langle grangle$?
        $endgroup$
        – user47370
        1 hour ago








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @user47370 If I may, let me try to give a counterexample. Take $A$ an abelian group, $H$ a f.g subgroup of $A$ and $gin A$ but $gnotin H$. Then $langle H,grangle$ is abelian but $H*langle grangle$ is not
        $endgroup$
        – giannispapav
        1 hour ago
















      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$

      In general, yes there is a difference between these two groups. For instance, consider the subgroups $2mathbf Z$ and $3mathbf Z$. Then we have $langle 2mathbf Z , 3mathbf Zrangle = mathbf Z$, but $2mathbf Zast3mathbf Z = 2mathbf Zastlangle 3ranglecongmathbf Zastmathbf Z$ is not an abelian group, since we do not impose any commutation relations between elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $2mathbf Z$ and the elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $3mathbf Z$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      In general, yes there is a difference between these two groups. For instance, consider the subgroups $2mathbf Z$ and $3mathbf Z$. Then we have $langle 2mathbf Z , 3mathbf Zrangle = mathbf Z$, but $2mathbf Zast3mathbf Z = 2mathbf Zastlangle 3ranglecongmathbf Zastmathbf Z$ is not an abelian group, since we do not impose any commutation relations between elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $2mathbf Z$ and the elements of (the isomorphic copy of) $3mathbf Z$.







      share|cite|improve this answer












      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer










      answered 1 hour ago









      Alex OrtizAlex Ortiz

      11.5k21442




      11.5k21442












      • $begingroup$
        thank you. That makes sense. In case $H$ is finitely generated and $gnotin H$ is it then true that $langle H,g rangle = H*langle grangle$?
        $endgroup$
        – user47370
        1 hour ago








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @user47370 If I may, let me try to give a counterexample. Take $A$ an abelian group, $H$ a f.g subgroup of $A$ and $gin A$ but $gnotin H$. Then $langle H,grangle$ is abelian but $H*langle grangle$ is not
        $endgroup$
        – giannispapav
        1 hour ago




















      • $begingroup$
        thank you. That makes sense. In case $H$ is finitely generated and $gnotin H$ is it then true that $langle H,g rangle = H*langle grangle$?
        $endgroup$
        – user47370
        1 hour ago








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @user47370 If I may, let me try to give a counterexample. Take $A$ an abelian group, $H$ a f.g subgroup of $A$ and $gin A$ but $gnotin H$. Then $langle H,grangle$ is abelian but $H*langle grangle$ is not
        $endgroup$
        – giannispapav
        1 hour ago


















      $begingroup$
      thank you. That makes sense. In case $H$ is finitely generated and $gnotin H$ is it then true that $langle H,g rangle = H*langle grangle$?
      $endgroup$
      – user47370
      1 hour ago






      $begingroup$
      thank you. That makes sense. In case $H$ is finitely generated and $gnotin H$ is it then true that $langle H,g rangle = H*langle grangle$?
      $endgroup$
      – user47370
      1 hour ago






      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @user47370 If I may, let me try to give a counterexample. Take $A$ an abelian group, $H$ a f.g subgroup of $A$ and $gin A$ but $gnotin H$. Then $langle H,grangle$ is abelian but $H*langle grangle$ is not
      $endgroup$
      – giannispapav
      1 hour ago






      $begingroup$
      @user47370 If I may, let me try to give a counterexample. Take $A$ an abelian group, $H$ a f.g subgroup of $A$ and $gin A$ but $gnotin H$. Then $langle H,grangle$ is abelian but $H*langle grangle$ is not
      $endgroup$
      – giannispapav
      1 hour ago













      3












      $begingroup$

      As @Dietrich Burde suggests you can take $H=G=$(any free group $F_n,nge1$) and then $langle G,Hrangle=H=G$ and $H*G$ is not isomorphic to $H$






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        3












        $begingroup$

        As @Dietrich Burde suggests you can take $H=G=$(any free group $F_n,nge1$) and then $langle G,Hrangle=H=G$ and $H*G$ is not isomorphic to $H$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          As @Dietrich Burde suggests you can take $H=G=$(any free group $F_n,nge1$) and then $langle G,Hrangle=H=G$ and $H*G$ is not isomorphic to $H$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          As @Dietrich Burde suggests you can take $H=G=$(any free group $F_n,nge1$) and then $langle G,Hrangle=H=G$ and $H*G$ is not isomorphic to $H$







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 1 hour ago









          giannispapavgiannispapav

          2,000325




          2,000325























              2












              $begingroup$

              Since none of these points are in the answers above, although they answer your question, I'd like to add some comments. I won't add a new counterexample, since the other answers already cover that, just add a more abstract viewpoint.



              First of all, there is an essential difference between $langle G,Hrangle$ and $G*H$, namely $langle G,Hrangle$ presupposes that $G$ and $H$ are embedded in some larger group, which I'll call $K$, whereas the free product does not. The group operation on $K$ may impose relations on $G$ and $H$ that are not present in the free product (which has no relations between the elements of $G$ and the elements of $H$).



              What this means concretely is that if we consider the homomorphism $phi:G*Hto K$ given by the universal property of the free product, its image is $langle G,Hrangle$, and its kernel tells us whether or not $G*H$ and $langle G,Hrangle$ are isomorphic (technically this only tells us if they're naturally isomorphic, but let's ignore that tangent).



              The elements of the kernel of $phi$ will be the relations between elements of $G$ and $H$ imposed by the group operation on $K$.



              If we look at giannispapav/Dietrich Burde's counterexamples, if we let $K=G=H=F_n$ be free groups, then $langle G,Hrangle =K$, and $G*H=F_{2n}$, and the map sends the word $g_1h_1g_2h_2cdots g_nh_n$ in $G*H$ to the result of evaluating this product in $K$.



              The relations are $g_Gg^{-1}_H=1$, where $g_G$ is an element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $G$, $g^{-1}_H$ is the inverse of the same element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $H$.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                Since none of these points are in the answers above, although they answer your question, I'd like to add some comments. I won't add a new counterexample, since the other answers already cover that, just add a more abstract viewpoint.



                First of all, there is an essential difference between $langle G,Hrangle$ and $G*H$, namely $langle G,Hrangle$ presupposes that $G$ and $H$ are embedded in some larger group, which I'll call $K$, whereas the free product does not. The group operation on $K$ may impose relations on $G$ and $H$ that are not present in the free product (which has no relations between the elements of $G$ and the elements of $H$).



                What this means concretely is that if we consider the homomorphism $phi:G*Hto K$ given by the universal property of the free product, its image is $langle G,Hrangle$, and its kernel tells us whether or not $G*H$ and $langle G,Hrangle$ are isomorphic (technically this only tells us if they're naturally isomorphic, but let's ignore that tangent).



                The elements of the kernel of $phi$ will be the relations between elements of $G$ and $H$ imposed by the group operation on $K$.



                If we look at giannispapav/Dietrich Burde's counterexamples, if we let $K=G=H=F_n$ be free groups, then $langle G,Hrangle =K$, and $G*H=F_{2n}$, and the map sends the word $g_1h_1g_2h_2cdots g_nh_n$ in $G*H$ to the result of evaluating this product in $K$.



                The relations are $g_Gg^{-1}_H=1$, where $g_G$ is an element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $G$, $g^{-1}_H$ is the inverse of the same element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $H$.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  Since none of these points are in the answers above, although they answer your question, I'd like to add some comments. I won't add a new counterexample, since the other answers already cover that, just add a more abstract viewpoint.



                  First of all, there is an essential difference between $langle G,Hrangle$ and $G*H$, namely $langle G,Hrangle$ presupposes that $G$ and $H$ are embedded in some larger group, which I'll call $K$, whereas the free product does not. The group operation on $K$ may impose relations on $G$ and $H$ that are not present in the free product (which has no relations between the elements of $G$ and the elements of $H$).



                  What this means concretely is that if we consider the homomorphism $phi:G*Hto K$ given by the universal property of the free product, its image is $langle G,Hrangle$, and its kernel tells us whether or not $G*H$ and $langle G,Hrangle$ are isomorphic (technically this only tells us if they're naturally isomorphic, but let's ignore that tangent).



                  The elements of the kernel of $phi$ will be the relations between elements of $G$ and $H$ imposed by the group operation on $K$.



                  If we look at giannispapav/Dietrich Burde's counterexamples, if we let $K=G=H=F_n$ be free groups, then $langle G,Hrangle =K$, and $G*H=F_{2n}$, and the map sends the word $g_1h_1g_2h_2cdots g_nh_n$ in $G*H$ to the result of evaluating this product in $K$.



                  The relations are $g_Gg^{-1}_H=1$, where $g_G$ is an element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $G$, $g^{-1}_H$ is the inverse of the same element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $H$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  Since none of these points are in the answers above, although they answer your question, I'd like to add some comments. I won't add a new counterexample, since the other answers already cover that, just add a more abstract viewpoint.



                  First of all, there is an essential difference between $langle G,Hrangle$ and $G*H$, namely $langle G,Hrangle$ presupposes that $G$ and $H$ are embedded in some larger group, which I'll call $K$, whereas the free product does not. The group operation on $K$ may impose relations on $G$ and $H$ that are not present in the free product (which has no relations between the elements of $G$ and the elements of $H$).



                  What this means concretely is that if we consider the homomorphism $phi:G*Hto K$ given by the universal property of the free product, its image is $langle G,Hrangle$, and its kernel tells us whether or not $G*H$ and $langle G,Hrangle$ are isomorphic (technically this only tells us if they're naturally isomorphic, but let's ignore that tangent).



                  The elements of the kernel of $phi$ will be the relations between elements of $G$ and $H$ imposed by the group operation on $K$.



                  If we look at giannispapav/Dietrich Burde's counterexamples, if we let $K=G=H=F_n$ be free groups, then $langle G,Hrangle =K$, and $G*H=F_{2n}$, and the map sends the word $g_1h_1g_2h_2cdots g_nh_n$ in $G*H$ to the result of evaluating this product in $K$.



                  The relations are $g_Gg^{-1}_H=1$, where $g_G$ is an element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $G$, $g^{-1}_H$ is the inverse of the same element $g$ of $K$ regarded as an element of $H$.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited 1 hour ago

























                  answered 1 hour ago









                  jgonjgon

                  16.5k32143




                  16.5k32143






















                      user47370 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                      draft saved

                      draft discarded


















                      user47370 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                      user47370 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      user47370 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3186562%2fdifference-between-generating-set-and-free-product%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Callistus I

                      Tabula Rosettana

                      How to label and detect the document text images