Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups (aka Factor Groups) - Abstract Algebra

Normal subgroups are a powerful tool for creating factor groups (also called quotient groups). In this video we introduce the concept of a coset, talk about which subgroups are “normal” subgroups, and show when the collection of cosets can be treated as a group of their own. As a motivation, we will begin by discussing congruences.
Our Abstract Algebra playlist is here:
bit.ly/Abstract...
Be sure to subscribe so you don't miss new lessons from Socratica:
bit.ly/1ixuu9W
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
Ways to support our channel:
► Join our Patreon : / socratica
► Make a one-time PayPal donation: www.paypal.me/...
► We also accept Bitcoin @ 1EttYyGwJmpy9bLY2UcmEqMJuBfaZ1HdG9
Thank you!
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
We recommend the following textbooks:
Dummit & Foote, Abstract Algebra 3rd Edition
amzn.to/2oOBd5S
Milne, Algebra Course Notes (available free online)
www.jmilne.org/...
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
Connect with us!
Facebook: / socraticastudios
Instagram: / socraticastudios
Twitter: / socratica
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
Teaching​ ​Assistant:​ ​​ ​Liliana​ ​de​ ​Castro
Written​ ​&​ ​Directed​ ​by​ ​Michael​ ​Harrison
Produced​ ​by​ ​Kimberly​ ​Hatch​ ​Harrison
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦

[@Socratica]

If you'd like to learn more, we have a free course on Group Theory! www.socratica.com/courses/group-theory

[@siddharthprakash8942]

The most useful series of mathematics videos I have encountered since 3blue1 brown

[@randomdude9135]

Yup. If you know any other awesome series like this, then it'll help me a lot.

[@manuthebroker5598]

I agree

[@vibodhj349]

Check out Faculty of Khan as well.

[@mychannelofawesome]

@@randomdude9135 please check Mathdoctorbob's series on abstract algebra... It's really great, really intuitive, and goes into phenomenal depth.

[@effy1219]

@@mychannelofawesome thanks!

[@ericvosselmans5657]

I am already quite old and trying to learn abstract algebra. Sometimes I just need a very clear and down to earth description of a mathematical object which can be quite hard to teach yourself from a book This channel provides an excellent tool in that regard. Thank you!

[@ThefamousMrcroissant]

Now try Analysis or Calculus III and absolutely tear those last remaining hairs on your head out. I took a second master in Electrical engineering when I was 32 and I felt like a fucking grandpa already.

[@samiaario8291]

I find it helps to have different source material for the same subject, and to skip back and forth between sources. These videos are great for that purpose.

[@alexamadori9884]

Can watch this almost effortlessly in the evening, trying to read the same theory from a book took almost a week of studying every morning and led to a more superficial understanding than this video. You guys are geniuses when it comes to presenting ideas, you're definitely on the list of channels I'd like to support when I'll be able to.

[@homiramanuj]

In Motivating Example, How do we get remainder 1 if we divide -14, -9, -4 etc. by 5? Please reply i am so confused 😢 integer mod 5 is confusing me

[@godspower_eze]

@@homiramanuj The smallest number closest to -4 that is divisible by 5 is -5 so -4 - (-5) is 1. Same goes for -9, -14 and so on.

[@erfanmirzaei705]

@@homiramanuj In the division quotient can be negative numbers. Thus, by dividing -14 by 5 we get -3 as quotient and -14-(-15)= 1. The point here that the quotient times divisor should be less than or equal to dividend.

[@whypeoplehategemini]

I had to play the video multiple times with several pauses along the way for me to grasp the concept.

[@christopherkemsley4758]

Somehow I stumbled upon your channel while searching for the Primer Vector Theory a couple days ago, and then watched your entire astronomy series ... and here I am watching the entire Abstract Algebra series. One thing that has always frustrated me trying to learn these things from, say, Wikipedia is that they're always written by people who fully understand the subject FOR people who fully understand the subject and and are quite difficult to understand until you understand it - even in cases where the concepts are quite simple. I'm so glad to have found your channel where you explain things so simply and so clearly. Thank you so much!

[@sadied0g]

This playlist is awesome! TOPOLOGY WHEN?!?!? 😁👍🏻

[@bakkamydestination]

S... waiting

[@vyrsh0]

Have they uploaded it now?

[@yeast4529]

You know it's a good video when the content seems simple and is really easy to comprehend. Sometimes I lose myself in all of the new definitions etc. in my Algebra course, but these videos pull everything together and help greatly with the motivation behind everything you learn.

[@howmathematicianscreatemat9226]

Everything they do here concerning teaching is badass., meaning they look "bad" in front of most professors because their biggest fear is - paradoxically- to be understood while the greatest mission of Socratica is to appear understandable. And hardly a one does a better job. Because maths is first and foremost supposed to be one thing: intuitive and fun. and ONLY THEN to be formal but only AFTER one has established and examined the concrete cases. Maths then appears to be a collection and characterization of those examples and not a collection of dead and unmotivated formal arguments, definitions and theorems. Formal symbols do have phenomenal value but only if one has gotten and intuitive understanding of the theorems and definitions first. Socratica does exactly this. That's why she should be nominated the Oscar prize for teaching mathematics.

[@winstonjiang3621]

“A living Socrates”

[@howmathematicianscreatemat9226]

Winston Jiang yeah,she kinda is :)

[@theboombody]

I blame the subject more than the teaching. It's very difficult for me to relate abstract algebra to anything I've seen in the past. The only interest I have for it now is it appears to be central in understanding why there is no general solution in radicals to the quintic equation. Which is interesting, but man, do we have to learn ALL this stuff just to understand that one problem?

[@alxjones]

@@theboombody Linear algebra is abstract algebra, as a vector space is an abelian group with a compatible field action (scalar multiplication). So in a sense, anything you can use linear algebra for is an application of abstract algebra. That aside, the slight generalization of vector spaces (where the field may be weakened to a ring), called modules, appear in calculus on manifolds: the set of vector fields on a (real) manifold M forms a C^r(M,R)-module. A formal theory of polynomials and rational functions also falls under abstract algebra, in the form of rings and fields. Polynomials are more than just "which ones can be solved via explicit formula" though; for example, differential equations such as y'' + 2y' + y = 0 can be studied as polynomial differential operators e.g. D^2 + 2D + 1. This is, of course, trivial for the constant coefficient case, but when the coefficients are polynomials, you end up with a polynomial ring which is not commutative, and so different techniques need to be developed. Groups themselves also find a good amount of importance in calculus and differential equations on manifolds, in the form of Lie groups. Lie groups are groups, first and foremost, which also have some kind of (smooth) manifold structure. Their related objects, the Lie algebras, are vector spaces with a certain kind of vector product (for example, R^3 with cross product is a Lie algebra). It is precisely the properties of groups that make Lie groups so useful, either as a manifold of study or as the typical fiber in a principal bundle structure. One last thing, the quotients that are being developed in this very video are the basis for the major tensor algebras, including the exterior (Grassman) algebra and the symmetric algebra. The tensor product of vector spaces itself is constructed by taking the vector space whose basis is indexed by pairs of vectors, then taking the quotient by the ideal generated by the properties we wish to hold. From the complete tensor algebra, the exterior and symmetric algebras are achieved by taking the quotient by the ideal generated by skew-symmetric and symmetric multiplication, respectively. Ideals are simply the equivalent of normal subgroups for rings and similar contexts, basically those substructures which allow quotients to have the desired structure. This is just a small sample of the use of abstract algebra in other areas of mathematics, obviously localized to my particular area of study. I hope you can come to realize that abstract algebra is not as self-contained as it seems, and the techniques and language learned from studying the subject is of great importance even in the relatively grounded subjects of calculus and differential equations.

[@itszeen7855]

@@alxjones what is your area of study/research?

[@ozzyfromspace]

This was my first time trying to learn and it didn't help. But I'm gonna try again, and again, and again until it makes sense. I'm committed to finishing your playlist with usable understanding. Keep up the amazing work, Socratica team!

[@luyombojonathan7715]

How did it go ??? Am starting on a similar journey

[@IBMboy]

my head hurts :( but i will try to watch it again later :)

[@randomdude9135]

Me too

[@ScilexGuitar]

lmao same

[@randomdude9135]

This time I understood atleast 50% I think. Time to ponder on my own and scribble around in a book.

[@adeelali8417]

SAME! I'll come back to the ending later....

[@souravacharya]

The way she teaches and explains , totally incredible...!

[@Arv.-]

The way you simplify a complex concept is great!

[@joshuaronisjr]

From 6:00 onwards, although the real case is more general, the entire thing becomes a lot easier to understand if every time she says "times" or "multiply" you think "plus" or "add", every time she says "N" you replace it with "Modulo(someNumber)", "e" is "0Modulo(someNumber)", and "x" and "y" are just numbers that aren't a multiple of someNumber. Cheers!

[@jonathanpopham5483]

the most approachable abstract algebra course online. thank you so much for your hard work!

[@alayamaryim]

The most understandable videos of abstract algebra on KZbin.Very easy to understand

[@homiramanuj]

In Motivating Example, How do we get remainder 1 if we divide -14, -9, -4 etc. by 5? Please reply i am so confused 😢 integer mod 5 is confusing me

[@ClumpypooCP]

@@homiramanujbecause -4 = (-1)*5+1

[@o.s.h.4613]

@@homiramanujA year late! But 5x1÷(-4) = remainder of 1. 5x2÷(-9) or 10÷(-9) = remainder of 1; 5x3÷(-14) or 15÷(-14) = remainder of 1. Etc. The sign doesn’t matter here, just that you need to make one step (in either direction) to get to the denominator :)

[@Anna-jy7cj]

This series is blowing my mind, your work is highly appreciated

[@homiramanuj]

In Motivating Example, How do we get remainder 1 if we divide -14, -9, -4 etc. by 5? Please reply i am so confused 😢 integer mod 5 is confusing me

[@ThePimp4dawin]

What an amazing series, this is a goldmine! Perfect depth and speed.

[@darsh9156]

This really helped me understanding this topic. I was really confused and now all the confusion is gone. Thanks a lot .

[@merlijn1e]

I use this series to accompany my lectures on abstract algebra, it helps me so much to understand what is going on. Thankyou!

[@LOL091027]

When we will have topology series like abstract algebra ?

[@DiegoGonzalez-xl9us]

i wish they do it

[@howmathematicianscreatemat9226]

Would you want me to ? Or in other words: would it still be useful for you ?

[@_qpdbdbqp_]

@@howmathematicianscreatemat9226 yes!!

[@howmathematicianscreatemat9226]

@@_qpdbdbqp_ okay, till when do you still need it? Tell me the date and also if you think good explanations could help your classmates too? If you tell me, then maybe I'm gonna start producing them when I'm back from holiday on the 25th of February. You would then view your first plesant set-topology video on the 27th of February. But if you want to me to start, confirm your request.

[@John-js2uj]

@@howmathematicianscreatemat9226 I'd also be grateful if you began posting on 27th Feb

[@jeromejean-charles6163]

Very good work : still to give a constructive critic: 1) I think the argument for definition yN=Ny could be exposed without going down to elements and avoiding inverse as much as possible.2) The transition from Z,+ to multiplicative is not the best though I cannot think of a simple multiplicative example fro cosets.3) It is so nice to finally see questions being asked to motivate a definition. Still from a didactic point of view it could be worth repeating the question at end ( recap style).

[@raunitsingh676]

Trying to find a word that describes my gratefulness for such incredible explanative videos.

[@cameronspalding9792]

@11:04 the set of permutations (123) (132) and the identity permutation form a normal subgroup of S3

[@Yougottacryforthis]

isnt it the only (non trivial) sub group as well as the only normal sub-group? any other basically fail to endure the closure property

[@cameronspalding9792]

@@Yougottacryforthis it’s the only non trivial normal subgroup, but not the only non trivial subgroup, just pick a set containing the identity and a 2 cycle

[@Gaspard832011]

Group is [ i (identity) , r1 (rotation 1/3), r2 (rotation 2/3), s1 (sym 1), s2 (sym 2) , s3 (sym3) ] (i,r1,r2) is a subgroup. This subgroup is normal because: s1* r1 *s1 =r2 s2* r1 *s2 =r2 s3* r1 *s3 =r2 (a symetry is its own inverse element)

[@sammie1824]

I got this too!

[@homiramanuj]

In Motivating Example, How do we get remainder 1 if we divide -14, -9, -4 etc. by 5? Please reply i am so confused 😢 integer mod 5 is confusing me

[@Adam-r2n]

eh meshe

[@malenaalmasi1774]

In really like the presentation style. Everything is very clear and all the explanations are easy to follow. Thank you so much

[@tomjoyce9401]

Excellent presentation: clear, to-the-point, fluid.

[@cameronspalding9792]

@7:25 replace y with y^(-1)

[@Socratica]

Socratica Friends, we wrote a book for you! How To Be a Great Student ebook: amzn.to/2Lh3XSP Paperback: amzn.to/3t5jeH3 or read for free when you sign up for Kindle Unlimited: amzn.to/3atr8TJ

[@youtwothirtyfive]

One more bit of constructive feedback, the exercise at the end, "find a normal subgroup of S_3", assumes knowledge of what symmetric subgroup S_3 is --going by the Abstract Algebra playlist order, the concept of a symmetric subgroup hasn't been introduced yet.

[@Socratica]

Sign up to our email list to be notified when we release more Abstract Algebra content: snu.socratica.com/abstract-algebra

[@GGC728]

The best video i ever viewed on youtube about group theory. Thanks alot

[@林宇博-w9l]

she saved my whole fxxking life during the senior this fall

[@Bloodsaberxy]

Was self studying Galois Theory and this helped to recap a lot of forgotten theorems, thanks a lot!

[@saeedahmedhashmi9448]

Mam your way of delivering lecturer is amazing,outstanding.. God bless you

[@ThePharphis]

Damn I really needed this video 4 days ago before my exam! (it went ok but factor groups was something that went over my head for most of the semester)

[@tomwellington4255]

5 years have passed, has this knowledge been useful to you outside the classroom?

[@ThePharphis]

@@tomwellington4255 No, but I teach high school and extremely rarely do I ever touch on these topics while tutoring. I think only once or twice (and it wasn't this far in depth)

[@tomwellington4255]

@@ThePharphis Thanks for taking the time to respond!

[@youtwothirtyfive]

Wow, great video! I learned a lot. One thing that felt unexplained was this statement just before 10:00 about factor groups that "the inverse of x⋅N is x^(-1)⋅N". I can play around with the integers mod 5 as an example and see it's true, but I'm wondering how to convince myself it works in general. Thanks again for making these :)

[@vladislavnikolaev800]

N is invariant subgroup, it means that for any x xN=Nx. (xN)(x^(-1)N)=(Nx)(x^(-1)N)=N(xx^(-1))N=N1N=NN=N. In factor group N is 1.

[@fitzregelbrugge3673]

I am studying for my Algebra exam and these videos give an amazing extra insight and perspective on the matter. Thank you!

[@Socratica]

We're so glad you're finding our videos helpful! Good luck with your exam!! 💜🦉

[@Souley239]

I really like you because explain the subject in an easy and understandable way.

[@tekhiun]

One of the best math series on youtube. maybe the best if you already have enough background to understand this. Thank you for doing this !

[@don611]

It gets confusing when she says "For cosets to act like a group xN yN = xy N" I didn t understand why so I thought about it. Assume the opposite: xN yN =zN with z not equal to xy. Using the identity we get: xy = zn for some n in N, multiply the left side by z^-1 we get z^-1xy = n. Therefor the coset x^-1zN has the element: x^-1z n = (x^-1z )(z^-1x)y = y So the coset yN and x^-1zN have the element y in common which according to the socratica video about lagrange theorem is a contradiction because two cosets can t have elements in common. This is why z must be equal to xy for the cosets to behave like a group.

[@ilguerrierodragone129]

Thank you for the explanation, although i didn't understand it very much. I think you could have said: xy = zn for some n then y = (x^-1)zn So y belongs to the coset (x^-1)zN, but y belongs also to the coset yN but the cosets have no element in common so itust be xy = z

[@don611]

@@ilguerrierodragone129 yes thank you. Sometimes I have difficulty explaining

[@don611]

Or thinking straight haha

[@carlsagan9808]

These videos are so helpful it's unreal

[@ajsdoa6282]

Thanks! Had to watch in 0.5x the speed to hang on, but very helpful! :)

[@sujoydey8359]

Too good explanation which covers most important part of normal subgroup. U are truly a good teacher.

[@sarthakkrishna1737]

So well explained!!!! Thank you! I have an exam tomorrow. I have now more confidence than apprehension XD

[@MayankGoel447]

Great lecture by the way! But I didn't understand why proving (xN)(yN)=xyN is sufficient to show the cosets form a Group? Edit: After couple of days of thinking and researching. I found that we make an assumption that (xN)(yN)=(xy)N. We can show that if (xN)(yN)=(zN) where z=xy, then the cosets form a group, it is clear the definition you multiply one coset by another coset and you get some another coset. The complete proof of proving it is a group is well described in the video. If (xN)(yN)=(xy)N is true for non-abelian group, then while proving LHS=RHS we have to make an assumption yN=Ny. If yN=Ny is true for all y, we say that the subgroup N is normal. Or we can rephrase it by multiplying by right inverse of y to both sides. yNy^-1=N. Therefore, Normal subgroup implies cosets form a group and vice versa.

[@KushG420]

but i have a more fundamental problem, I don;t understand what does the statement _ xN combined with yN = (xy)N even mean where the hell did the set xyN came from

[@ramumaha2779]

took me watching it twice to understand perfectly(have to oil my brain)....awesome to the point explanation.

[@Socratica]

This is our favourite thing about KZbin compared to classes - you can just rewatch! Thanks for sticking it out with us! 💜🦉

[@njahnavi7943]

Thanks a ton !!! Explained with such clarity. It was to the point , excellent explanation.❤️

[@sudarshann7194]

Is it nityananda who's in your profile?? 🤔

[@Adam-r2n]

@@sudarshann7194 eh ktir excellent

[@shacharh5470]

S(3) is isomorphic to D(3) the dihedral group of 6 elements so the normal subgroup would be the rotations or the subgroup generated by a 3-cycle.

[@Nand0san35]

Yes, I agree, and it is easy if you see that all inverses out of rotation subgroup are itself. f1*g1*f1=g1

[@ashmytom8927]

You have made things simple!....Thankyou

[@KeystoneScience]

just in time for finals ;)

[@Socratica]

Hooray! That's what we were hoping. :D Good luck!!

[@CreolLanguag]

@@Socratica i have a question: since y^-1(N)y = N, if we multiply both sides by y in their left. y[y^-1(N)y] = yN Ny = yN so does this mean that cosets form a group only if left cosets is the same as their right cosets? is this always the case?

[@haroonahmad1850]

@@CreolLanguag good question. What's the answer of this question? Did you get it?

[@jamaluddin9158]

@@CreolLanguag Yes that is correct!

[@rekarlopunzalan]

Watching this during finals

[@halilibrahimcetin9448]

Happiness is nothing but understanding stg properly. These vids series are fuckin' awesome.

[@quahntasy]

This was explained very amazingly. Thanks for this :)

[@RobotProctor]

I wish I could upvote this video 100 times.

[@finn5571]

So how would one prove the second part of the statement at 7:27? I proved it by showing the first part, and then showing that the two have to have the same order and no duplicates. I'm not sure if this is the right approach though.

[@ubersham]

Where were you in 2016 when I was taking Abstract Algebra??? 😝 Love the series. I’ll be going through each one several times until I understand your proofs and can duplicate them (again?).

[@sutanuhait3283]

Excellent work. Students are recommended to watch this video. It will help to motivate you properly.

[@turokg1578]

bro this video is amazing. i was like wtf is this quotient groups and cosets reading dummit&foote. came here and its all clear now. can continue reading. thanks

[@syamalchattopadhyay2893]

Outstanding video lecture. This video lecture is very helpful for self-study.

[@souravsingh3025]

Great explaination love it , makes the topic fun 💝💝

[@ijyoyo]

WOW, so nice and easier to understand. Beats the textbook 100%.

[@pubudunuwan1751]

your all videos are very descriptive .it helps to solve many troubles .i wish to do more and more videos. thank you

[@knok16]

I think reasoning on 6:12 lack some crucial point: You can use any element from gN coset to generate gN coset, i.e. if h in gN coset then gN=hN. (and looks like it is not a property but rather a definition of these equivalence classes(cosets): "the set G/N is defined as the set of equivalence classes where two elements g,h are considered equivalent if the cosets gN and hN are the same" brilliant.org/wiki/quotient-group/) That's why we can use xyN coset on the right instead of generic zN coset (since x in xN and y in yN: zN should contains xy element to respect definition given at 4:19, and then xy can be used to generate zN coset which means zN=(xy)N)

[@RobotProctor]

I think N={123,231,312} is a normal subgroup (rotations of the dihedral group). 123 is e. The 3 possible elements to form cosets with are the flips from the dihedral group, which are their own inverses. So y*N*y^-1 will involve a flip, rotation, and a flip again which will result in a simple rotation. Since this is a rotation it's in N.

[@iwantaoctosteponmyneckbut3545]

Not really, but you have the right idea by focusing on 3-cycles (i.e. permutations whose cycle decompositions have 3 numbers in them). If N is a subgroup of S3, we know it uses the group operation of S3, function composition, which I'm writing as "*". (1 2 3) can't be the identity for N because (1 2 3)*(2 3 1) = (1 3 2) =/= (2 3 1). N needs the identity element from S3, which is just (). Also, the (2 3 1) and (3 1 2) in your N are the same permutation In reality, N = {(), (1 2 3), (1 3 2)}. You have () as your identity, and the other two permutations act as inverses of each other. Associativity and closure are pretty obvious too, so this N is a group, and thus a subgroup of S3

[@huttarl]

@@iwantaoctosteponmyneckbut3545 Where did you get (1 2 3)*(2 3 1) = (1 3 2)? By my figuring, John C is right that (1 2 3)*(2 3 1) = (2 3 1). (1 2 3) is indeed the identity element. Maybe you're using cycle notation? whereas John is using one-line notation.

[@user_sense]

@@iwantaoctosteponmyneckbut3545 you just defined the same thing as jonny but with cycles, and unless i missed something, none of you gave a proper proof, (but jonny did explain why it is indeed a normal subgroup)

[@physicslover9227]

Thanks a lot this videos series is very useful. It explains everything in a very simple way🙂🙏🏻🙏🏻.

[@nilotpalsharma1526]

Great lecture! Thank you so much for presenting Abstract Algebra so eloquently. But I do not seem to understand one tiny bit. Why are Quotient Groups not a Subgroup? They seem to contain all the elements of G, in this case, all the integers Z. Which elements are missing in G/N?

[@AalapShah12297]

It's because the addition/multiplication operation is now different. And the elements of the quotient group are the cosets of the original group, not single elements. For example, Z/5Z is not a subgroup of Z in the traditional sense. In the original group, 3+3=6 while in the quotient group, 3'+3'=1' (note that these are congruence classes, not numbers, so while 6 is an element in 1', it is not equal to it). On the other hand, 5Z is clearly a subgroup of Z. It's just a matter of strictly following the definition of a subgroup.

[@andeslam7370]

Just a recap to what @Aalap Shah has said, Quotient group is a set of subsets of the group. To be a subset of the group, a set should contains some of its elements or being empty. Therefore, quotient group is not a subset and by extension, not a subgroup

[@SpiritVector]

Simple groups are the primes of group theory.

[@rosaaanaaa]

studying for my math classes is enjoyable with Socratica

[@exx8eran]

wow you took such a complicated subject and make it so simple.

[@192ali1]

Thank you. Excellent presentation.

[@moularaoul643]

Thank you so much!!!

[@maulikjain3894]

one can listen this forever/..

[@cameronspalding9792]

@11:03 the set {I, (123), (132)} is a subgroup of S3

[@briancannard7335]

It's great how you show the truth of mathematicians. They love to multiply elements and cosets in the same statement jumping between levels of abstraction.

[@briancannard7335]

Why care that cosets form a group?

[@briancannard7335]

Mathematicians need to invent a disclaimer about generalization levels, and attach it to all concepts created. Each time I see a "Factor Group" now or a "Quotient Group" I'll think about, ah... it's a group of cosets, not of elements! Thank you @Socratica!

[@ishikasharma1000]

This is so helpful, I can now clearly visualise these concepts 😍🙌. Your videos are amazing, Thankyou Socratica✨

[@ronycb7168]

Indian here really enjoying this series happy republic day guys

[@homiramanuj]

In Motivating Example, How do we get remainder 1 if we divide -14, -9, -4 etc. by 5? Please reply i am so confused 😢 integer mod 5 is confusing me

[@theboombody]

This video was very handy for me.

[@raymondblake5765]

At 6:22 the video says that for the cosets to act like a group x*y should be in the product of xN *yN. What property of a group makes this so and why? There must be something I'm missing...

[@mike11022]

so that the product of two cosets is well defined. it's not a property of group, it's a necessary condition for the product of cosets to be well defined.

[@sergiomanzetti1021]

Good work. A minor comment; at 0.55 you say "multiples of 5, positive and negative" but it seems to me as additives of 5, positives and negatives,.

[@cameronspalding9792]

@10:45 if you find the factors associated with the composition series: is it possible to then reconstruct the group after factoring it

[@gn3166]

Where does the (xN)(yN) = xyN come from for the cosets to form a group? Can we use any other operations to form a group with cosets?

[@youtuber_nr3504]

Why do x^{-1} and y^{-1} exist at 6:55? Cosets do not have inverse elements in general, do they?

[@sinisternightcore3489]

Hmm... Both x and y are contained in G, so they must have inverses.

[@mohammadamanalimyzada8332]

thank u i love the way u teach. I didnt understand my professor but here go everything I needed any videos on Mathematical Analysis?

[@homiramanuj]

In Motivating Example, How do we get remainder 1 if we divide -14, -9, -4 etc. by 5? Please reply i am so confused 😢 integer mod 5 is confusing me

[@tulsisheth5825]

When you divide -14 by 5 then reminder is 1. By division algorithm: a = bq+ r; 0

[@sinisternightcore3489]

My solution for the exercise. Would like to confirm: I found 4 subgroups, 1 of order 3 and 3 of order 2. Only the one with 3 elements is a normal subgroup.

[@valeriobertoncello1809]

I think you're right, because noone of the order 2 subgroups can be treated as the neutral element of a quotient group.

[@cuneytkaymak4997]

5:32 the music starting here is so beautiful, i cannot focus on the video :)) , i just close my eyes and listen the music, it is so relaxing, anyone knows what that song is?

[@murielfang755]

So so great. So well delivered.

[@lokeshwarreddy2549]

Can u explain coset multiplication briefly

[@sigmatechie9528]

I am eagerly waiting for Real numbers, Complex Numbers, Probability , Number Theory etc

[@bryanchambers1964]

Coursera has a good courses on Complex analysis, and some probability courses too, oh yeah and one on Galois Theory but that one will be very very hard because its taught by a Russian lady. For other courses you can look on MIT open courses, maybe you will find something.

[@ctrlsys-exe]

Such a beautiful topic

[@b43xoit]

Where did the series introduce symmetric groups, and particularly S sub 3?

[@LucaMolari]

This one? kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZKxlnaNh8-bbqs

[@ingun37]

What does “product of coset” means at 6:12 ? like cartesian product? but instead of pairs (x,y) you use x*y?

[@mike11022]

No, it's the group operation in the quotient group (the elements are the cosets, the identity is the normal subgroup). At 6:12, we show that this product of cosets are well defined because product (group operation of the original group) of any elements of two cosets belong to the same third coset. Then next it's trivial to show that the cosets under this operation form a group, i.e. the quotient group.

[@genie365]

Abstract Algebra is so difficult :\ I hope this math minor is worth the work lol

[@navjotsingh2251]

I know its difficult but its motivating to see it in action. See on google how groups are used in cryptography and quantum physics. I find applications to make it more interesting and easy to remember concepts.

[@Len314159]

This is actually the easy part of Abstract Algebra .... ha-ha, just kidding

[@xyzct]

What's great is that your math minor will make the rest of life seem rather easy.

[@guiorasokolovsky2783]

PLEASE show us how Gauss proved the possibility to construct a 17 sides regular polygon

[@eminentlostcity1754]

I'm a university student from India and here teachers don't teach basics because most of the students here are really good at studies....so this is really helpful for weak students like me.... I'm trying my best

[@hemanthkumartirupati]

Do you plan to teach vector spaces in future? Your videos are incredibly helpful btw :) Thanks a lot

[@okoyoso]

They have a video on it from three years ago.

[@niloufarashayeri704]

I understood this so much better than Fraleigh's book. Thank you :)

[@estebanvasquez-giraldo5770]

Why is it that in 6:05, for the cosets to act like a group, x*y must be in (xN)(yN). I appreciate any help, thanks beforehand!

[@primaljeroen2405]

Idk if you still need it, but any group is closed under its operation.

[@primaljeroen2405]

@Hamza Zaidi I'm not sure if I know what you're asking me but I'll try to explain something. First try to understand that we're proving that the cosets act like a group. One property of groups is closure under its operation. To prove this, we must show that (xN)*(yN) is still a coset in which * is a random operation. I dont necessarily think multiplication is the only operation you can use here but I could be wrong about that. If you're confused about the notation (xN)(yN): this isn't necessarily multiplication, it's just an arbitrary operation noted this way because math is lazy. Hope this helped

[@primaljeroen2405]

@Hamza Zaidi yes

[@LuizaDreamsDeutsch]

Thank you so much for the explanation!

[@datadecides]

I don't get it what is she talking but she talks very good