Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-27
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

If ord⁡(g)=n then gk=e iff k is an integer multiple of n, the powers g0,…,gn−1 are distinct, and ⟨g⟩ has exactly n elements; if g has infinite order then gj=gk only for j=k

Statement

Let G be a group, g∈G, and let orders be as in The order ∣G∣ of a finite group and the order ord⁡(g) of an element, with ord⁡(g)=∞ when no positive power of g is the identity. Throughout, a natural number written where an integer is expected means its image under the embedding ι:N→Z of The naturals embed in the integers.

Finite order. Suppose ord⁡(g)=n with n∈N, n≥1. Then:

  1. for every k∈Z, gk=e if and only if k=qn for some q∈Z, that is, if and only if n∣k (Division with remainder in Z: for a∈Z and b>0 there are unique q,r∈Z with a=qb+r and 0≤r<b);
  2. the powers g0,g1,…,gn−1 are pairwise distinct: if i,j∈N with i<n, j<n and gi=gj, then i=j;
  3. ⟨g⟩={ gs:s∈N, s<n } and ⟨g⟩≈n; so ⟨g⟩ is finite with ∣⟨g⟩∣=n=ord⁡(g).

Infinite order. If ord⁡(g)=∞ then for j,k∈Z, gj=gk implies j=k; so the integer powers of g are pairwise distinct and ⟨g⟩ is not finite.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A group G with identity e and an element g∈G; Sg={ k∈N:k≥1, gk=e }, and ord⁡(g)=min⁡Sg when Sg≠∅, ord⁡(g)=∞ otherwise (The order ∣G∣ of a finite group and the order ord⁡(g) of an element, with ord⁡(g)=∞ when no positive power of g is the identity).

[L1]

Exponent laws: gx+y=gxgy, g−x=(gx)−1 and (gx)y=gxy for all x,y∈Z; the first also holds for natural exponents in any monoid (Exponent laws in a group: gm+n=gmgn and (gm)n=gmn for all m,n∈Z, and (gh)n=gnhn when g and h commute, Powers gn: natural exponents in a monoid and integer exponents in a group, with g0=e).

[L3]

Division with remainder: for k∈Z and b>0 there are unique q,r∈Z with k=qb+r and 0≤r<b (Division with remainder in Z: for a∈Z and b>0 there are unique q,r∈Z with a=qb+r and 0≤r<b).

[L4]

ι is injective, preserves addition, multiplication and order, and its image is exactly the nonnegative integers; ι(0)=0, ι(1)=1 (The naturals embed in the integers). The order on Z is total and antisymmetric and Z is a commutative ring (The integers form a totally ordered ring, The integers form a commutative ring, Order on the integers, The integers as equivalence classes of pairs of naturals).

[L7]

On N: the order is membership, so n={ s∈N:s<n } (On N the order is membership: m<n  ⟺  m∈n); i≤j means i+t=j for some t (Order on the natural numbers); exactly one of i<j, i=j, j<i holds (Trichotomy of the order on N).

[L8]

Finiteness and counting: A is finite when A≈m for some m∈N, and that m is unique (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable, Equinumerous sets, A≈B and A⪯B, The pigeonhole principle on N); a bijection is an injective and surjective map (Injection, surjection, bijection).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

ex=e for every x∈Z. For natural exponents the set of t with et=e contains 0, since e0=e, and is closed under σ, since eσ(t)=ete=e e=e; induction gives it for all naturals. For x<0 write −x=ι(k); then ex=(ek)−1=e−1=e.

givenL1L4L5L6
1.2

Assume ord⁡(g)=n with n≥1. Then n∈Sg, so gn=e, and no natural s with 1≤s<n satisfies gs=e, since n is the least element of Sg. Also ι(n)>0, because n≥1 and ι preserves the order.

givenL4
1.3

Infinite order. Assume Sg=∅ and suppose gj=gk with j,k∈Z and j≠k. Put x:=j−k, so x≠0 and gx=gjg−k=gj(gk)−1=e. Also g−x=(gx)−1=e−1=e. By totality one of x and −x is positive; call it y, so gy=e and y=ι(s) with s∈N and s≠0, hence s≥1. Then s∈Sg, contradicting Sg=∅.

givenL1L4L5
2.1

The "if" half of claim 1: if k=qι(n) for some q∈Z, then gk=gι(n)q=(gι(n))q=(gn)q=eq=e.

step 1.1step 1.2L1L4
2.2

The "only if" half. Suppose gk=e. Divide: k=qι(n)+r with 0≤r<ι(n), legitimate since ι(n)>0. Then e=gk=gqι(n)gr=(gn)qgr=eqgr=gr. Since 0≤r, we have r=ι(s) for a unique s∈N, and ι(s)<ι(n) forces s<n, because otherwise n≤s and ι would give ι(n)≤ι(s), contradicting antisymmetry. So gs=e with s<n.

step 1.1step 1.2L1L3L4L7
2.3

Claim 2. Let i,j∈N with i<n, j<n and gi=gj. By trichotomy we may assume i≤j, interchanging the names if necessary, and then i+t=j for some t∈N. Now gigt=gi+t=gj=gi=gie, so gt=e by cancellation. Moreover t≤j, since t+i=j, and j<n, so t<n. If t≥1 then t∈Sg with t<n, impossible; so t=0 and i=j.

step 1.2L1L5L7
2.4

Therefore in the infinite-order case gj=gk forces j=k. Moreover ⟨g⟩ is then not finite: a bijection ψ:⟨g⟩→m with m∈N would make k↦ψ(gι(k)) a map σ(m)→m, and that map is injective, since ι is injective, distinct integer exponents give distinct powers by step 1.3, and ψ is injective; but claim 1 of the pigeonhole principle forbids an injection σ(m)→m.

step 1.3L2L4L8
3.1

In step 2.2 the case s≥1 is impossible, since it would put s in Sg below its least element; hence s=0, so r=0 and k=qι(n). With step 2.1 this is claim 1.

step 1.2step 2.1step 2.2L4
3.2

Every integer power of g is one of g0,…,gn−1: given x∈Z, divide x=qι(n)+r with 0≤r<ι(n), write r=ι(s) with s∈N and s<n as in step 2.2, and compute gx=(gn)qgr=eqgs=gs.

step 1.1step 1.2step 2.2L1L3L4
4.1

Claim 3. By [L2] and step 3.2, ⟨g⟩={ gs:s∈N, s<n }. The map φ:n→⟨g⟩ with φ(s)=gs is well defined, the elements of the natural number n being exactly the naturals s<n; it is surjective by the displayed description and injective by step 2.3. So φ is a bijection, ⟨g⟩≈n, and ⟨g⟩ is finite with ∣⟨g⟩∣=n=ord⁡(g), the value ∣⟨g⟩∣ being the unique natural equinumerous with ⟨g⟩.

step 2.3step 3.2L2L7L8
5.1

Claims 1, 2 and 3 are steps 3.1, 2.3 and 4.1, and the infinite-order statement is steps 1.3 and 2.4.

step 3.1step 2.3step 4.1step 1.3step 2.4∎

Remarks

  • The division algorithm is exactly what is needed and nothing more. Claim 1 reduces an arbitrary integer exponent to a remainder in {0,…,n−1}; that reduction is the only place where arithmetic in Z beyond the ring laws enters, and it is why Division with remainder in Z: for a∈Z and b>0 there are unique q,r∈Z with a=qb+r and 0≤r<b is proved on this page.

  • The count in claim 3 starts at exponent 0. The n distinct powers are g0=e,g1,…,gn−1; there are n of them because n, as a von Neumann natural, is the set {0,1,…,n−1} of exponents used (On N the order is membership: m<n  ⟺  m∈n). Reading the list as starting at g1 would give a count off by one.

  • The identity ∣⟨g⟩∣=ord⁡(g) is what makes the order of an element a statement about a subgroup, and is the step on which the later result that the order of an element divides the order of the group rests.

Depends on

Used by

…and 9 more results.

Dependency tree · two levels

57 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources