MHB Surjectivity of x²+3 for Real Numbers: Testing for Surjectivity

AI Thread Summary
The function f(x) = x² + 3 is not surjective for real numbers because it cannot produce outputs less than 3, which is its minimum value. To test for surjectivity, one typically takes an arbitrary value y in the codomain and attempts to solve for x in the equation f(x) = y. If there are values in the codomain that cannot be reached, the function is not surjective. Proper notation is crucial when discussing functions and their mappings. Therefore, the conclusion is that f(x) = x² + 3 does not cover all real numbers.
markosheehan
Messages
133
Reaction score
0
is the function x²+3 surjective for real numbers. how do you test for surjectivity in general?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
markosheehan said:
is the function x²+3 surjective for real numbers. how do you test for surjectivity in general?

Hi markosheehan,

Welcome to MHB! :)

Let's say a function $f$ maps some $X \in \mathbb{R}$ to $Y \in \mathbb{R}$. You might write that like $f: X \rightarrow Y|X,Y \in \mathbb{R}$ or maybe just $f:R \rightarrow R$. $f$ is surjective if every element in $Y$ is mapped to by at least one input in $X$. If $Y$ is the output of the function, we need to hit every value in $Y$ in order for $f$ to be surjective.

In this example we have $f(x)=x^2+3$. If $Y$ is all real numbers, can we output to all real numbers? Are there any numbers that we cannot map to?

In general the process of proving a function is subjective when going from $R \rightarrow R$ is to take some random $y \in Y$ and solve for it in terms of $x$. Is that possible here? What happens when you try to solve for $y$?
 
Jameson said:
Let's say a function $f$ maps some $X \in \mathbb{R}$ to $Y \in \mathbb{R}$. You might write that like $f: X \rightarrow Y|X,Y \in \mathbb{R}$ or maybe just $f:R \rightarrow R$.
This should say $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}$ instead of $X\in\mathbb{R}$. Also, $R$ in $f:R \rightarrow R$ should probably be $\mathbb{R}$, just like in the first occurrence.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
This should say $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}$ instead of $X\in\mathbb{R}$. Also, $R$ in $f:R \rightarrow R$ should probably be $\mathbb{R}$, just like in the first occurrence.

Good points, thank you! Proper notation is important.

Since the OP hasn't responded I will go ahead and answer the original question. $f(x)=x^2+3$ is not surjective for real numbers as it has a global minimum at $y=3$. Any number less than 3 is not mapped to by this function.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top