Proof of Set Function f(f^-1(Y'))\subseteqY

Good luck with your investigations!In summary, to prove f(f^-1(Y'))\subseteqY' for some f: X -> Y and Y' in Y, we can start by assuming y∈f(f^-1(Y')). Then, by the definition of f(A), there exists an x in f^-1(Y') such that f(x) = y. Since x is in f^-1(Y'), we know that f(x) = y for some y in Y'. Therefore, f(f^-1(Y'))⊆Y', and our proof is complete. However, if f is not surjective, we may encounter difficulties in this proof.
  • #1
autre
117
0
I need to prove f(f^-1(Y'))[itex]\subseteq[/itex]Y' for some f: X -> Y and Y' in Y.

So far, I've been able to figure this much out:

Let y[itex]\in[/itex]f(f^-1(Y')). Then, f^-1(Y') = x' for some x' in X such that f(x') = y' for some y' in Y'. Then, f(x') = y'. Thus, f(f^-1(Y'))[itex]\subseteq[/itex]Y'.

I feel like there's something wrong with my proof. Any ideas on where I went wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Any ideas?
 
  • #3
autre said:
I need to prove f(f^-1(Y'))[itex]\subseteq[/itex]Y' for some f: X -> Y and Y' in Y.

You probably mean Y' subset of Y.

So far, I've been able to figure this much out:

Let y[itex]\in[/itex]f(f^-1(Y')). Then, f^-1(Y') = x'

What does that even mean?? Y' is a set, so [itex]f^{-1}(Y^\prime)[/itex] is a set. But x' is an element. So you're saying that a set is equal to an element?

Start with [itex]y\in f(f^{-1}(Y^\prime))[/itex]. Write out the definitions. What is the definition for [itex]y\in f(A)[/itex]??
 
  • #4
Thanks for the input micromass.

I've revised the proof as thus:

Let y∈f(f^-1(Y')). Since f^-1(Y') = X' s.t. X'⊆X and f(X')=Y'. Since y∈f(X'), y∈Y'. Thus, f(f^-1(Y'))⊆Y'.

I still feel like I'm missing a step or two.
 
  • #5
autre said:
Since f^-1(Y') = X' s.t. X'⊆X and f(X')=Y'.

Why??

This would imply

[tex]f{-1}(f(X^\prime))=X^\prime[/tex]

which does not always hold.
 
  • #6
Why??

You're right, I can't assume f is bijective. Should I instead say something like "there exists an x∈X s.t. x∈f^-1(Y')?
 
  • #7
Maybe a good comment to make is that, in the nicest-possible case, you have:

f-1of(X)=fof-1X=X.

Nicest possible is, of course, f is 1-1 and onto. Try to see why identity above fails when f is either not 1-1 or not onto.

TMFKAB (The Mathematician* Formerly Known as Bacle)

*In training.
 
  • #8
Not sure how that helps, Bacle2. Basically, if the function isn't surjective there could exist a b in B' such that f^-1(B') doesn't exist, and I'm not sure how to handle this case.
 
  • #9
autre said:
Not sure how that helps, Bacle2. Basically, if the function isn't surjective there could exist a b in B' such that f^-1(B') doesn't exist, and I'm not sure how to handle this case.

Bacle wasn't giving you a hint to solve the problem. He gave you another problem which could be rewarding to look at to expand your knowledge.

To solve your problem. What does it mean that [itex]y\in f(A)[/itex]. Apply this to [itex]y\in f(f^{-1}(y))[/itex].
 
  • #10
What does it mean that y∈f(A). Apply this to y∈f(f−1(y)).

I think I follow. You mean something like:

Let y∈f(f^-1(Y')). Then, there exists an x in f^-1(Y') s.t. f(x) = y. Since x in f^-1(Y'), f(x) = y for some y in Y'. Thus, f(f^-1(Y'))⊆Y'.
 
  • #12
Yes, Autre, sorry if my post was confusing; just trying to give some insight and some related results, as Micromass said.
 

What is the meaning of "Proof of Set Function f(f^-1(Y'))\subseteqY"?

This statement means that the set function f applied to the inverse of the set Y' is a subset of the original set Y.

Why is proving this statement important in science?

In science, we often use set functions to represent relationships between different sets of data. Proving this statement ensures that the function is well-defined and accurately represents the relationship between the sets.

How can I prove this statement?

To prove this statement, you can use mathematical techniques such as set theory, logic, and algebra. You will need to show that every element in the set f(f^-1(Y')) is also in the set Y.

What are some possible applications of this statement in scientific research?

This statement can be used to validate mathematical models and theories, analyze data, and make predictions about relationships between different sets of data. It can also be used to identify errors or inconsistencies in scientific studies.

Are there any limitations or exceptions to this statement?

Yes, there may be cases where this statement does not hold true. For example, if the set Y' is not a subset of the domain of f, then the statement may not be valid. Additionally, the statement may not hold true if the function f is not well-defined or if there are errors in the data being analyzed.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
230
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
861
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
736
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
7
Views
833
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
966
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top