MHB Proving Inverse of 1-1 Function $f$

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Inverse
AI Thread Summary
To prove that for a one-to-one function \( f \), the equation \( f^{-1}(f(x)) = x \) holds for all \( x \) in the domain of \( f \), it is important to clarify that \( f^{-1}(y) \) is a subset of the domain of \( f \) when \( y \) is in the target of \( f \). The correct statement is \( f^{-1}(f(x)) = \{x\} \). Assuming there exists another element \( x' \) in \( f^{-1}(f(x)) \) that is not equal to \( x \) leads to a contradiction, as it would imply \( f(x') = f(x) \), violating the one-to-one property. Visualizing the function's mapping can help in understanding this concept intuitively. Thus, the relationship holds true for one-to-one functions.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hi! (Wave)

Could you give me a hint how I could show that if $f$ is a function, that is $1-1$, then, it stands that:

$$(\forall x \in dom(f)) f^{-1}(f(x))=x$$

? (Thinking)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
Hi! (Wave)

Could you give me a hint how I could show that if $f$ is a function, that is $1-1$, then, it stands that:

$$(\forall x \in dom(f)) f^{-1}(f(x))=x$$

? (Thinking)

Firstly, there is a problem with your statement as such.

Note that $f^{-1}(y)$ is a subset of the domain of $f$ whenever $y$ is in the target of $f$. So what you intend to write is this:

$$(\forall x\in \text{dom}f)\ f^{-1}(f(x))=\{x\}$$

Now. Assume that there is some pesky $x$ in the domain of $f$ such that $f^{-1}(f(x))=S\neq \{x\}$.

Note that $x$ is clearly in $S$.

By assumption, there exists $x'\in S$ such that $x'\neq x$. But then $f(x')=f(x)$ where $x'\neq x$. So $f$ is not $1$-$1$.

This is merely language. If you find this cryptic, try thinking what a $1$-$1$ looks like in terms of pictures. Make the domain a a "bubble" and put a few dots in it. Do the same for the target. From here it should be intuitively clear what's happening.
 
I'm taking a look at intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL). Basically it exclude Double Negation Elimination (DNE) from the set of axiom schemas replacing it with Ex falso quodlibet: ⊥ → p for any proposition p (including both atomic and composite propositions). In IPL, for instance, the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) p ∨ ¬p is no longer a theorem. My question: aside from the logic formal perspective, is IPL supposed to model/address some specific "kind of world" ? Thanks.
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...

Similar threads

Back
Top