- #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
- 3,998
- 48
In Munkres book "Topology" (Second Edition), Munkres proves that a function F is a homeomorphism ...
I need help in determining how to find the inverse of \(\displaystyle F\) ... so that I feel I have a full understanding of all aspects of the example ...
Example 5 reads as follows:View attachment 4193Wishing to understand all aspects of the problem I tried to see how given
\(\displaystyle F(x) = \frac{x}{1 - x^2} \)
one could determine the inverse of \(\displaystyle F\) (and then come up with \(\displaystyle G\), as Munkres did ... ... somehow ??) ... ...I think I proceed by putting
\(\displaystyle y = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}\)
and solving for \(\displaystyle x\) ... ... BUT how exactly do I proceed (I got nowhere with this problem!)Can someone please help?NOTE... I realize that being able to determine the inverse of F and show it is G is not strictly necessary in showing that F is a homeomorphism ... BUT ... I feel very dissatisfied that I cannot see exactly how this works ... so, again, I hope someone can help ...
Peter
I need help in determining how to find the inverse of \(\displaystyle F\) ... so that I feel I have a full understanding of all aspects of the example ...
Example 5 reads as follows:View attachment 4193Wishing to understand all aspects of the problem I tried to see how given
\(\displaystyle F(x) = \frac{x}{1 - x^2} \)
one could determine the inverse of \(\displaystyle F\) (and then come up with \(\displaystyle G\), as Munkres did ... ... somehow ??) ... ...I think I proceed by putting
\(\displaystyle y = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}\)
and solving for \(\displaystyle x\) ... ... BUT how exactly do I proceed (I got nowhere with this problem!)Can someone please help?NOTE... I realize that being able to determine the inverse of F and show it is G is not strictly necessary in showing that F is a homeomorphism ... BUT ... I feel very dissatisfied that I cannot see exactly how this works ... so, again, I hope someone can help ...
Peter