Right inverse clarification needed

  • MHB
  • Thread starter dana1
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Inverse
In summary, the inverse function of a function is a function that takes one input and returns its inverse. Two inverse functions can be defined if the same conditions are met, such as taking the function z=f(x,y) and substituting y=x-1 for y in z.
  • #1
dana1
4
0
f: (R*R)->R
f(x,y)=x+y

if I'm asked to write 2 right inversed fanctions of f.
can I say that:

f1: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-1, 1)

f2: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-2, 2)

because: f(f1(x))= f(x-1,1)=x-1+1=x

well this does matches the definition of right inverse function but what bothers me
I guess is that there is no more y on f1.
but it seems more of a problem to define:
f3(x)= (x-y, y)
because then we will receive a hole range of functions. (Whew)

please can someone clarify this point out? thanks so much in advance!(Blush)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
dana said:
f: (R*R)->R
f(x,y)=x+y

if I'm asked to write 2 right inversed fanctions of f.
can I say that:

f1: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-1, 1)

f2: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-2, 2)

because: f(f1(x))= f(x-1,1)=x-1+1=x

well this does matches the definition of right inverse function but what bothers me
I guess is that there is no more y on f1.
but it seems more of a problem to define:
f3(x)= (x-y, y)
because then we will receive a hole range of functions. (Whew)

please can someone clarify this point out? thanks so much in advance!(Blush)

Hi dana! Welcome to MHB!

That all seems fine to me. ;)

To make the matter less confusing, I would suggest to use a different letter, say t.
So you would have for instance:
$$f_1(t) = (t-1,t)$$
That is be cause this $t$ is in no way connected to the $x$ and $y$ that you have in $f$.

The $y$ that you have in $f_3$ is also not connected to the $y$ in $f$.
It is just an arbitrary constant.
So it would be less confusing to write:
$$f_3(t) = (t - c, c)$$
 
  • #3
dana said:
f: (R*R)->R
f(x,y)=x+y

if I'm asked to write 2 right inversed fanctions of f.
can I say that:

f1: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-1, 1)

f2: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-2, 2)

because: f(f1(x))= f(x-1,1)=x-1+1=x

well this does matches the definition of right inverse function but what bothers me
I guess is that there is no more y on f1.
but it seems more of a problem to define:
f3(x)= (x-y, y)
because then we will receive a hole range of functions. (Whew)

please can someone clarify this point out? thanks so much in advance!(Blush)

You can define an inverse function $\displaystyle x = f^{- 1} (y)$ if it exists a function $\displaystyle y = f(x)$ in which for any value of x there is one and only one value of y. Similarly if You have a two variable function z= f(x,y) You can define two inverse two variable functions $\displaystyle x= f^{-1} (y,z)$ and $\displaystyle y = f^{-1}(x,z)$ if the same conditions are satisfied. In Your case is $\displaystyle z = f(x,y) = x + y$ , so that the two inverse functions are $\displaystyle x = f^{-1} (y,z) = z - y$ and $\displaystyle y = f^{-1} (x,z) = z - x$...

Kind regards$\chi$ $\sigma$
 

FAQ: Right inverse clarification needed

What is a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" in scientific research?

A "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" refers to a situation in which the data or results of a study do not align with the initial hypothesis or expected outcomes. This indicates that further investigation or clarification is required to fully understand and interpret the findings.

How does a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" impact the validity of a study?

A "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" can significantly impact the validity of a study as it suggests that the initial hypothesis may not be supported by the data. This could call into question the overall reliability of the study and may require further analysis or replication to confirm the results.

What are some potential reasons for a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" in research?

There are several potential reasons for a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" in research, including measurement error, sample bias, or unaccounted-for variables. Additionally, unexpected results could also be attributed to the complexity of the phenomenon being studied or limitations in the research methods.

How can scientists address a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" in their research?

To address a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed," scientists may need to re-evaluate their initial hypothesis and consider alternative explanations for the results. They may also need to review and improve their research methods, such as increasing sample size or controlling for potential confounding variables.

Are there any potential benefits to a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" in research?

While a "Right Inverse Clarification Needed" may initially be seen as a setback in research, it can also lead to new discoveries and further understanding of a phenomenon. It challenges scientists to think critically and consider alternative explanations, ultimately contributing to the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Back
Top