Whitehead problem: Difference between revisions
m Bot: Migrating 2 interwiki links, now provided by Wikidata on d:q2905020 |
Double sharp (talk | contribs) →Discussion: I was wondering about that :D |
||
(21 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Distinguish|Whitehead theorem|Whitehead conjecture}} |
|||
{{Use shortened footnotes|date=May 2021}} |
|||
In [[group theory]], a branch of [[abstract algebra]], the '''Whitehead problem''' is the following question: |
In [[group theory]], a branch of [[abstract algebra]], the '''Whitehead problem''' is the following question: |
||
{{quote|1=Is every [[abelian group]] ''A'' with [[Ext functor|Ext]]<sup>1</sup>(''A'', '''Z''') = 0 a [[free abelian group]]?}} |
|||
[[Saharon Shelah]] proved that Whitehead's problem is [[Independence (mathematical logic)|independent]] of [[ZFC]], the standard axioms of set theory.{{r|Shelah1974}} |
|||
==Refinement== |
==Refinement== |
||
Assume that ''A'' is an abelian group such that every short [[exact sequence]] |
|||
The condition Ext<sup>1</sup>(''A'', '''Z''') = 0 can be equivalently formulated as follows: whenever ''B'' is an abelian group and ''f'' : ''B'' → ''A'' is a [[surjective]] [[group homomorphism]] whose [[kernel (algebra)|kernel]] is [[isomorphic]] to the group of [[integer]]s '''Z''', then there exists a group [[homomorphism]] ''g'' : ''A'' → ''B'' with ''fg'' = [[identity function|id<sub>''A''</sub>]]. Abelian groups satisfying this condition are sometimes called '''Whitehead groups''', so Whitehead's problem asks: is every Whitehead group free? |
|||
:<math>0\rightarrow\mathbb{Z}\rightarrow B\rightarrow A\rightarrow 0</math> |
|||
must split if ''B'' is also abelian. The Whitehead problem then asks: must ''A'' be free? This splitting requirement is equivalent to the condition Ext<sup>1</sup>(''A'', '''Z''') = 0. Abelian groups ''A'' satisfying this condition are sometimes called '''Whitehead groups''', so Whitehead's problem asks: is every Whitehead group free? It should be mentioned that if this condition is strengthened by requiring that the exact sequence |
|||
:<math>0\rightarrow C\rightarrow B\rightarrow A\rightarrow 0</math> |
|||
must split for any abelian group ''C'', then it is well known that this is equivalent to ''A'' being free. |
|||
''Caution'': The converse of Whitehead's problem, namely that every free abelian group is Whitehead, is a well known group-theoretical fact. Some authors call ''Whitehead group'' only a ''non-free'' group ''A'' satisfying Ext<sup>1</sup>(''A'', '''Z''') = 0. Whitehead's problem then asks: do Whitehead groups exist? |
''Caution'': The converse of Whitehead's problem, namely that every free abelian group is Whitehead, is a well known group-theoretical fact. Some authors call ''Whitehead group'' only a ''non-free'' group ''A'' satisfying Ext<sup>1</sup>(''A'', '''Z''') = 0. Whitehead's problem then asks: do Whitehead groups exist? |
||
==Shelah's proof== |
==Shelah's proof== |
||
Saharon Shelah showed that, given the canonical [[ZFC]] axiom system, the problem is [[Independence (mathematical logic)|independent of the usual axioms of set theory]].{{r|Shelah1974}} More precisely, he showed that: |
|||
* If |
* If [[Axiom of constructibility|every set is constructible]], then every Whitehead group is free; |
||
* If [[Martin's axiom]] and the negation of the [[continuum hypothesis]] both hold, then there is a non-free |
* If [[Martin's axiom]] and the negation of the [[continuum hypothesis]] both hold, then there is a non-free Whitehead group. |
||
Since the [[consistency]] of ZFC implies the consistency of |
Since the [[consistency]] of ZFC implies the consistency of both of the following: |
||
*The |
*The axiom of constructibility (which asserts that all sets are constructible); |
||
* |
*Martin's axiom plus the negation of the continuum hypothesis, |
||
Whitehead's problem cannot be resolved in ZFC. |
Whitehead's problem cannot be resolved in ZFC. |
||
==Discussion== |
==Discussion== |
||
[[J. H. C. Whitehead]], motivated by the [[second Cousin problem]], first posed the problem in the 1950s. |
[[J. H. C. Whitehead]], motivated by the [[second Cousin problem]], first posed the problem in the 1950s. Stein answered the question in the affirmative for [[countable]] groups.{{r|Stein1951}} Progress for larger groups was slow, and the problem was considered an important one in [[abstract algebra|algebra]] for some years. |
||
Shelah's result was completely unexpected. While the existence of undecidable statements had been known since [[Gödel's incompleteness theorem]] of 1931, previous examples of undecidable statements (such as the [[continuum hypothesis]]) had all been in pure [[set theory]]. The Whitehead problem was the first purely algebraic problem to be proved undecidable. |
Shelah's result was completely unexpected. While the existence of undecidable statements had been known since [[Gödel's incompleteness theorem]] of 1931, previous examples of undecidable statements (such as the [[continuum hypothesis]]) had all been in pure [[set theory]]. The Whitehead problem was the first purely algebraic problem to be proved undecidable. |
||
Shelah later showed that the Whitehead problem remains undecidable even if one assumes the continuum hypothesis.{{r|Shelah1977|Shelah1980}} In fact, it remains undecidable even under the [[generalised continuum hypothesis]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~trlifaj/ANK_5.pdf |title=The Whitehead Problem and Beyond (Lecture notes for NMAG565) |last=Triflaj |first=Jan |date=16 February 2023 |website= |publisher=[[Charles University]] |access-date=26 September 2024 |quote=}}</ref> The Whitehead conjecture is true if all sets are [[constructible universe|constructible]]. That this and other statements about uncountable abelian groups are provably independent of [[ZFC]] shows that the theory of such groups is very sensitive to the assumed underlying [[set theory]]. |
|||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
*[[Free abelian group]] |
*[[Free abelian group]] |
||
*[[Whitehead |
*[[Whitehead torsion]] |
||
*[[List of statements undecidable in ZFC]] |
*[[List of statements undecidable in ZFC]] |
||
*[[Statements true in L|Statements true |
*[[Axiom of constructibility#Statements true in L|Statements true in L]] |
||
== References == |
== References == |
||
{{reflist|refs= |
|||
⚫ | |||
<ref name=Shelah1974>{{cite journal |last=Shelah |first=S. |author-link=Saharon Shelah |date=1974 |title=Infinite Abelian groups, Whitehead problem and some constructions |journal=[[Israel Journal of Mathematics]] |volume=18 |issue=3 |pages=243–256 |doi=10.1007/BF02757281 | doi-access= |mr=0357114 |s2cid=123351674}}</ref> |
|||
|doi= 10.2307/2318684|publisher= The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83, No. 10|jstor=2318684}} An expository account of Shelah's proof. |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | <ref name=Stein1951>{{cite journal |last=Stein |first=Karl |date=1951 |title=Analytische Funktionen mehrerer komplexer Veränderlichen zu vorgegebenen Periodizitätsmoduln und das zweite Cousinsche Problem |journal= Mathematische Annalen |volume=123 |pages=201–222 |doi=10.1007/BF02054949 | doi-access= |mr=0043219|s2cid= 122647212 }}</ref> |
||
*{{citation| first=S.|last=Shelah|title=Infinite Abelian groups, Whitehead problem and some constructions |
|||
⚫ | |||
<ref name=Shelah1977>{{cite journal |last=Shelah |first=S. |author-link=Saharon Shelah |date=1977 |title=Whitehead groups may not be free, even assuming CH. I |
|||
|journal=Israel Journal of Mathematics |volume=28 | |
|journal=[[Israel Journal of Mathematics]] |volume=28 |issue=3 |page=193-203 |doi=10.1007/BF02759809 | doi-access=free |mr=0469757 |hdl=10338.dmlcz/102427 |hdl-access=free |s2cid=123029484}}</ref> |
||
<ref name=Shelah1980>{{cite journal |last=Shelah |first=S. |author-link=Saharon Shelah |date=1980 |title=Whitehead groups may not be free, even assuming CH. II |
|||
|journal=Israel Journal of Mathematics |volume=35 |year=1980|pages=257–285|doi=10.1007/BF02760652|mr=0594332|issue=4}} |
|||
⚫ | |||
*{{citation |
|||
}} |
|||
|last=Stein|first= Karl |
|||
⚫ | |||
==Further reading== |
|||
|doi=10.1007/BF02054949 |
|||
{{refbegin}} |
|||
|mr=0043219}} |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
{{refend}} |
|||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Whitehead Problem}} |
|||
[[Category:Independence results]] |
[[Category:Independence results]] |
||
[[Category:Group theory]] |
[[Category:Group theory]] |
Latest revision as of 05:30, 26 September 2024
In group theory, a branch of abstract algebra, the Whitehead problem is the following question:
Is every abelian group A with Ext1(A, Z) = 0 a free abelian group?
Saharon Shelah proved that Whitehead's problem is independent of ZFC, the standard axioms of set theory.[1]
Refinement
[edit]Assume that A is an abelian group such that every short exact sequence
must split if B is also abelian. The Whitehead problem then asks: must A be free? This splitting requirement is equivalent to the condition Ext1(A, Z) = 0. Abelian groups A satisfying this condition are sometimes called Whitehead groups, so Whitehead's problem asks: is every Whitehead group free? It should be mentioned that if this condition is strengthened by requiring that the exact sequence
must split for any abelian group C, then it is well known that this is equivalent to A being free.
Caution: The converse of Whitehead's problem, namely that every free abelian group is Whitehead, is a well known group-theoretical fact. Some authors call Whitehead group only a non-free group A satisfying Ext1(A, Z) = 0. Whitehead's problem then asks: do Whitehead groups exist?
Shelah's proof
[edit]Saharon Shelah showed that, given the canonical ZFC axiom system, the problem is independent of the usual axioms of set theory.[1] More precisely, he showed that:
- If every set is constructible, then every Whitehead group is free;
- If Martin's axiom and the negation of the continuum hypothesis both hold, then there is a non-free Whitehead group.
Since the consistency of ZFC implies the consistency of both of the following:
- The axiom of constructibility (which asserts that all sets are constructible);
- Martin's axiom plus the negation of the continuum hypothesis,
Whitehead's problem cannot be resolved in ZFC.
Discussion
[edit]J. H. C. Whitehead, motivated by the second Cousin problem, first posed the problem in the 1950s. Stein answered the question in the affirmative for countable groups.[2] Progress for larger groups was slow, and the problem was considered an important one in algebra for some years.
Shelah's result was completely unexpected. While the existence of undecidable statements had been known since Gödel's incompleteness theorem of 1931, previous examples of undecidable statements (such as the continuum hypothesis) had all been in pure set theory. The Whitehead problem was the first purely algebraic problem to be proved undecidable.
Shelah later showed that the Whitehead problem remains undecidable even if one assumes the continuum hypothesis.[3][4] In fact, it remains undecidable even under the generalised continuum hypothesis.[5] The Whitehead conjecture is true if all sets are constructible. That this and other statements about uncountable abelian groups are provably independent of ZFC shows that the theory of such groups is very sensitive to the assumed underlying set theory.
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ a b Shelah, S. (1974). "Infinite Abelian groups, Whitehead problem and some constructions". Israel Journal of Mathematics. 18 (3): 243–256. doi:10.1007/BF02757281. MR 0357114. S2CID 123351674.
- ^ Stein, Karl (1951). "Analytische Funktionen mehrerer komplexer Veränderlichen zu vorgegebenen Periodizitätsmoduln und das zweite Cousinsche Problem". Mathematische Annalen. 123: 201–222. doi:10.1007/BF02054949. MR 0043219. S2CID 122647212.
- ^ Shelah, S. (1977). "Whitehead groups may not be free, even assuming CH. I". Israel Journal of Mathematics. 28 (3): 193-203. doi:10.1007/BF02759809. hdl:10338.dmlcz/102427. MR 0469757. S2CID 123029484.
- ^ Shelah, S. (1980). "Whitehead groups may not be free, even assuming CH. II". Israel Journal of Mathematics. 35 (4): 257–285. doi:10.1007/BF02760652. MR 0594332. S2CID 122336538.
- ^ Triflaj, Jan (16 February 2023). "The Whitehead Problem and Beyond (Lecture notes for NMAG565)" (PDF). Charles University. Retrieved 26 September 2024.
Further reading
[edit]- Eklof, Paul C. (December 1976). "Whitehead's Problem is Undecidable". The American Mathematical Monthly. 83 (10): 775–788. doi:10.2307/2318684. JSTOR 2318684. An expository account of Shelah's proof.
- Eklof, P.C. (2001) [1994], "Whitehead problem", Encyclopedia of Mathematics, EMS Press