Proving Validity of Function Compositions: A Comprehensive Guide

In summary, Homework Equations states that make functions in which the Im f subseteq C and Im g subseteq E. These functions are valid only if fcirc(gcirc h) = hcirc(gcirc f).
  • #1
Hobold
83
1

Homework Statement



Make [; f: A \rightarrow B ;], [; g: C \rightarrow D ;], [; h: E \rightarrow F ;] functions in which [; \text{Im} f \subseteq C;] and [; \text{Im} g \subseteq E;]. Show that [; f \circ ( g \circ h ) ;] and [; h \circ ( g \circ f ) ;] are valid if, and only if, [; f \circ ( g \circ h ) = h \circ ( g \circ f) ;].

Homework Equations



...

The Attempt at a Solution



Though the proof seems to be very trivial, I couldn't see very deeply.

I set the propositions necessary for the functions to exist, but I couldn't find a relation in the images, domains and codomains to make them equal.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You probably meant:

Make [itex] f: A \rightarrow B [/itex], [itex] g: C \rightarrow D [/itex], [itex] h: E \rightarrow F [/itex] functions in which [itex] \text{Im} f \subseteq C[/itex] and [itex] \text{Im} g \subseteq E[/itex]. Show that [itex] f \circ ( g \circ h ) [/itex] and [itex] h \circ ( g \circ f ) [/itex] are valid if, and only if, [itex] f \circ ( g \circ h ) = h \circ ( g \circ f) [/itex].

But it looks wrong at first sight.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Yeah, that's exactly what I wrote
 
  • #4
Hobold said:
Yeah, that's exactly what I wrote

Came out as:

Make [; f: A \rightarrow B ;], [; g: C \rightarrow D ;], [; h: E \rightarrow F ;] functions in which [; \text{Im} f \subseteq C;] and [; \text{Im} g \subseteq E;]. Show that [; f \circ ( g \circ h ) ;] and [; h \circ ( g \circ f ) ;] are valid if, and only if, [; f \circ ( g \circ h ) = h \circ ( g \circ f) ;].

on my screen. But there are some welly strange things happening with the Latex processing.
 
  • #5
Suppose [itex]f:\mathbb{N}\rightarrow \mathbb{N}[/itex] is [itex]f:n\mapsto n+1[/itex], [itex]g=f[/itex] and [itex]h:\mathbb{N}\rightarrow \mathbb{N}[/itex] is [itex]h:n\mapsto max(n-2,0)[/itex].

Are both [itex]f\circ(g\circ h)[/itex] and [itex]h\circ(g\circ f)[/itex] defined? If so, are they equal?
 
  • #6
Martin, when you edit and it doesn't work correctly (and editing LaTex often gives that problem), try clicking on the "refresh" button. That often clears up the problem. Why it doesn't "refresh" automatically, I don't know!
 
  • #7
Thanks. With luck that should save me some work.

But in this instance it was Hobold's entry that was garbled and I hadn't edited it. In fact it still looks garbled on my screen (even after refresh).
 
  • #8
When I said, "But it looks wrong", I was referring to the content rather than the typesetting.
 

FAQ: Proving Validity of Function Compositions: A Comprehensive Guide

What is the purpose of proving validity of function compositions?

The purpose of proving validity of function compositions is to ensure that a composite function is mathematically sound and produces accurate results. This is important in various fields such as mathematics, physics, and computer science, where function compositions are commonly used.

How do you prove the validity of function compositions?

To prove the validity of function compositions, you must show that the composition of two or more functions is equal to the original function. This can be done using algebraic manipulation, substitution, or by evaluating the functions at specific values. You can also use mathematical proofs or diagrams to demonstrate the validity of the composition.

What are the common mistakes to avoid when proving the validity of function compositions?

Some common mistakes to avoid when proving the validity of function compositions include not considering the domain and range of the functions, using incorrect algebraic rules or properties, and not showing all the steps in the proof. It is also important to carefully evaluate the composition at each step to avoid errors.

Can you use function compositions to prove the validity of other mathematical concepts?

Yes, function compositions can be used to prove the validity of other mathematical concepts such as inverse functions, polynomial equations, and trigonometric identities. This is because function compositions involve combining multiple functions and evaluating them, which is a common technique used in mathematical proofs.

Why is it important to have a comprehensive guide for proving validity of function compositions?

A comprehensive guide for proving the validity of function compositions provides a structured and systematic approach to ensure accuracy and consistency in the process. It also helps to avoid common mistakes and provides helpful tips and techniques for solving complex compositions. This can be particularly useful for students and researchers in various fields where function compositions are commonly used.

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
3K
Back
Top