4
$\begingroup$

Possible Duplicate:
The direct sum $\oplus$ versus the cartesian product $\times$

Is there a difference in the proof in showing that two cyclic groups $C_m\times C_n\cong C_{mn}$ where $m,n$ are relatively prime and showing that $C_m\bigoplus C_n$ for the same $m,n$? Is there a catch?

  • 0
    See [this previous question](http://m$a$th.sta$c$ke$x$change.co$m$/$a$/39903/742).2012-02-15

2 Answers 2

7

So far as I know, the two notations mean the same thing. There is a difference if, instead of two groups, you have infinitely many.

  • 1
    As to why you were given the question, maybe your instructor is using different definitions. Best to ask your instructor.2012-02-16
2

In any category, a coproduct $A\oplus B$ is characterized by having two maps $A\to A\oplus B$ and $B\to A\oplus B$ with the property that given any pair of maps $f: A\to C$ and $g: B\to C$ there exists a unique map $f\oplus g: A\oplus B \to C$ such that $A\to A\oplus B \to C$ is the map $f: A\to C$ and $B\to A\oplus B \to C$ is the map $g: B\to C$.

Dually, a product $A\times B$ is characterized by having two maps $A\times B \to A$ and $A\times B \to B$ with the property that given any pair of maps $f: C\to A$ and $g: C\to B$ there exists a unique map $f\times g: C\to A\times B$ such that $C\to A\times B \to A$ is $f$ and $C\to A\times B \to B$ is $g$.

In an additive category (in which zero maps make sense), the universal properties give a canonical map $A\oplus B \to A\times B$ given by $\Gamma = (id_A\times 0) \oplus (0\times id_B)$. We also have the composite maps $\alpha: A\times B \to A \to A\oplus B$ and $\beta: A\times B \to B \to A\oplus B$, and since we can add maps we get a map $\Delta = \alpha + \beta: A\times B \to A\oplus B$. Now, we can use the universal properties to see that $\Gamma$ and $\Delta$ are inverse isomorphisms.

  • 0
    Here's a discussion of "canonical", I don't have anything insightful to say about it: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/19644/what-is-the-definition-of-canonical2012-02-15