Bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar?

In summary: I think it's called "Division with Remainder" in English. Given a and b in \mathbb{N}, we can find unique q and r in \mathbb{N}, such that a = bq + r and 0 ≤ r < b.So we can associate with each (a,b) in S the natural number g(a,b) := b^2 + ar. Show that this is injective.
  • #1
Eclair_de_XII
1,083
91

Homework Statement


"Prove that ##S = \{(a, b) : a, b ∈ ℕ## and ##b ≥ 2a\}## is denumerable."

Homework Equations


Basically, my aim is to find a bijection ##f: ℕ→S##.

The Attempt at a Solution


Define ##f: ℕ→S## by ##f(x)≥2x##.

Then suppose that there exist ##x_1∈ℕ## and ##x_2∈ℕ## such that ##x_1≠x_2## but ##f(x_1)=f(x_2)##. Then ##2x_1=2x_2## implies that ##x_1=x_2##. This produces a contradiction; so ##f(x_1)=f(x_2)## implies ##x_1=x_2##. Similarly, suppose that ##x_1=x_2##. Multiplying both sides by ##2## implies ##f(x_1)=f(x_2)##. Therefore, ##f## is injective.

What I'm having trouble doing, is proving that an ordered pair ##(a_0,b_0)∈S## has a pre-image ##a_0∈ℕ##. I'm trying to express the ordered pair as ##f(a_0)=(a_0,b_0)##. Suppose that for an arbitrary ##(a_0,b_0)∈S##, there exists an ##a_0∈ℕ## such that ##f(a_0)=(a_0,b_0)##. I would say that there always exists a ##b_0## that is greater than ##a_0## because of the fact that the set of natural numbers has no "most" element. How would I write this formally, if this is correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Eclair_de_XII said:

Homework Statement


"Prove that ##S = \{(a, b) : a, b ∈ ℕ## and ##b ≥ 2a\}## is denumerable."

Homework Equations


Basically, my aim is to find a bijection ##f: ℕ→S##.

The Attempt at a Solution


Define ##f: ℕ→S## by ##f(x)≥2x##.
Stop right there. You haven't defined a function to begin with. What is ##f(1),~f(2),~f(3),\dots##? You have to have a formula or algorithm or something which tells you the exact values of ##f(n)## before you can even talk about whether it is 1-1 or onto.
 
  • #3
Eclair_de_XII said:

Homework Statement


"Prove that ##S = \{(a, b) : a, b ∈ ℕ## and ##b ≥ 2a\}## is denumerable."
Do you have a clear idea of what your set looks like? That might help you come up with a formula for your function, as LCKurtz suggests.
 
  • #4
Okay, so I redefined ##f:ℕ→S## as ##f(x)=(x,2x)## and ##range(f(x))=\{(x,2x):x∈ℕ\}⊂S##. Then I proved that it was injective by contradiction. Let ##x_1,x_2∈ℕ## such that ##x_1≠x_2## and ##f(x_1)=f(x_2)##. This implies that ##(x_1,2x_1)=(x_2,2x_2)##, which produces a contradiction. But I ran into the problem of proving that it was surjective. Basically, I went about this through an inductive hypothesis. I basically said that ##f(1)=(1,2)∈S##. Then I assumed that for some ##k∈ℕ##, ##f(k)=(k,2k)∈S##. I didn't exactly need induction for this, but in the end, I ended up saying that every natural number is a pre-image of some ##f(x)∈S##. And since the domain of ##f## is ℕ, then there cannot be an ##f(x_0)## with no pre-image in ℕ. I think I proved only that the range of ##f## is denumerable. And I cannot say much for ##S##, other than the fact that it's infinite...
 
  • #5
Whenever you can prove something directly, it is preferred to assumptions for contradictions. [unless it's an exercise meant to practice proof by contrapositive/contradiction or what have you.]

For injectivity you have to show ##(x,2x) = (y,2y)## implies ##x=y ##. This is immediate, because equality of ordered pairs is defined via component-wise equality. Your mapping, however fails to be surjective and that is quite obvious, as well. For ##(1,3)\in S ## there is no ##x\in\mathbb N ## such that ##f(x) = (x,2x)=(1,3)##.

It suffices to construct injective mappings ##S\to\mathbb N## and ##\mathbb N\to S## [Cantor-Bernstein], for it is often simpler than finding an explicit bijection. You have one direction covered, now how about an injection ##S\to\mathbb N ##?

As for ##S ## being an infinite set, if you want to be thorough, then you should prove it. A set ##M ## is infinite if it contains a proper subset ##M' ## such that there is a one to one correspondence between ##M ## and ##M'##. In this case, it's obvious the set ##S## is infinite.

You may also note that ##\mathbb N\times\mathbb N ## is countably infinite i.e it's in a one to one correspondence with ##\mathbb N ##, therefore it would also suffice to construct a bijection ##\mathbb N\times\mathbb N\to S ## or like before, construct two injections.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
It might help you to see a picture of your set.
grid.jpg

The dots correspond to points in your set S. If you were going to start counting them, what would you do? That might get you started thinking about an appropriate mapping.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
nuuskur said:
It suffices to construct injective mappings ##S\to\mathbb N## and ##\mathbb N\to S## [Cantor-Bernstein], for it is often simpler than finding an explicit bijection. You have one direction covered, now how about an injection ##S\to\mathbb N## ?

Hm, so it suffices to find two different injections? That would make this problem easier, I think. Thanks.

LCKurtz said:
If you were going to start counting them, what would you do?

I guess I would draw a line through each of them?
 
  • #8
Eclair_de_XII said:
Hm, so it suffices to find two different injections? That would make this problem easier, I think. Thanks.
I don't think so. One injection is trivial and you have already done it. And finding the other injection is essentially equivalent to your problem.

I guess I would draw a line through each of them?
Describe how you would count them. Which would be number 1? Number 2? Etc. Take the picture I gave you and label the dots 1,2,3, etc. Do you understand that if you can "count" them you know your function?
 
  • #9
Let's see...

M6uCtEa.jpg
 
  • #10
Eclair_de_XII said:
Let's see...

View attachment 196061
Why are you skipping over some? And there is no need for any n's. Just number all the dots you see in some sensible order as 1,2,3,4,5,6... Do it in such a way that you could keep going if the picture was larger.
 
  • #11
I didn't know in which direction to count the dots, so I just went with the function ##g(a,b)=a+b-1##. If that's wrong, then here is the result of my effort, in any case.

EiHsZKi.jpg
 
  • #12
It suffices to exhibit an injection [itex]f : S \to \mathbb{N}[/itex], as [itex]S[/itex] will then be (finite or) countable.

An easy way to do that is to exploit the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.
 
  • #13
It seems to be that it would be easier to generalize and prove that the 2-fold Cartesian product of two countable sets is countable, then prove that a subset of a countable set is countable.
 
  • #14
@Eclair_de_XII No. I mean label them like this:
grid1.jpg

Doesn't that suggest a bijection between your ##S## and ##N##? Now I realize that it depends on the level of sophistication required for whatever class you are taking what kind of proof they will accept. Certainly this is an informal indication of a bijection. Of course there is more work to do if you wish to find a formula for this in the form ##f(n) = (?,?)##. Or you can use ideas some of the others have posted.
 
  • #15
pasmith said:
An easy way to do that is to exploit the fundamental theorem of arithmetic.

In the end, I ended up doing this. I defined a function ##f:ℕ×ℕ→ℕ## by ##f(m,n)=2^m⋅3^n## and said that the prime factorization for each ##(m_0,n_0)## was unique. So ##f## was injective. Suffice it to say, I think I could have said that ##f:ℕ×ℕ→f(ℕ×ℕ)⊂ℕ## is bijective. And since the subset of any denumerable set is also denumerable, then I could have then said that there exists a bijection between the Cartesian product of natural numbers and a denumerable set. Thus, ##|ℕ×ℕ|=|ℕ|##. I learned this in class...
 
  • #16
#16
since the subset of any denumerable set is also denumerable

Isn't denumerability the same as countable infinity? Are finite subsets countably infinite?
 

Related to Bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar?

1. What is a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar?

A bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar is a function that maps each element in the ordered pair to a unique element in the scalar set, and vice versa. This means that each element in the ordered pair has a one-to-one correspondence with an element in the scalar set.

2. How is a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar different from other types of functions?

Unlike other types of functions, a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar has both injective and surjective properties. This means that it is both one-to-one and onto, ensuring that each element in the ordered pair is mapped to a unique element in the scalar set, and that every element in the scalar set has a corresponding element in the ordered pair.

3. What is the purpose of a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar?

The purpose of a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar is to establish a one-to-one correspondence between two sets, allowing for efficient and accurate mapping of elements between the two sets. This is particularly useful in fields such as mathematics, computer science, and data analysis.

4. How is a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar represented?

A bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar is typically represented using mathematical notation, such as f: A → B, where A is the ordered pair set and B is the scalar set. The function is then defined as f(x,y) = z, where z is the unique element in the scalar set that corresponds to the ordered pair (x,y).

5. Can a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar have multiple inverse functions?

No, a bijective function between an ordered pair and a scalar can only have one inverse function. This is because the function must be both injective and surjective, meaning that each element in the ordered pair is mapped to a unique element in the scalar set, and that every element in the scalar set has a corresponding element in the ordered pair. Having multiple inverse functions would violate this property.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
826
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top