A A bit of clarification on the domain of a composite function

lawsonfurther
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Recently when I reviewed something about the composite function for my calculus exam, I remembered I had been thinking a question for quite a long time (maybe I was going into a dead end) since I was in high school.

I was thinking whether f(x)=1/(1/x) and g(x)=x are the same function or not.
It seems like f(x) is essentially g(x) but according to some kind of definition:

" The composition of two functions f and g is the function h = f ◦ g defined by h(x) = f(g(x)), for all x in the domain of g such that g(x) is in the domain of f. "

Then if I take p(x)=q(x)=1/x (just to avoid confusion), then the composite function is f(x)=p(q(x)), for all x in the domain of q such that q(x) is in the domain of p(x). While in this case, q(x) or the range of q(x), namely (-∞,0)∪(0,∞), is always in the domain of p(x), and all x in the domain of q is also (-∞,0)∪(0,∞), then should the domain of f(x) be (-∞,0)∪(0,∞)? If so, f(x) and g(x) have different domains (the domain of g(x) is R obviously). Does it mean f(x) and g(x) are different functions?
(Of course I could have used just p(x)=1/x and said f(x)=p(p(x)), but it's just for avoiding some confusion.
Hope you will get that idea.)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You are right, ##f## and ##g## are different functions, simply because ##f(0)## isn't defined, whereas ##g(0)## is.
They both coincide on ##\mathbb{R}-\{0\}##, and in case we would only consider functions on the multiplicative part of the reals, that is ##\mathbb{R}^*=\mathbb{R}-\{0\}## they are indeed equal. But this is a bit artificial in this situation. On the entire real number line, we have two straights through the origin, but ##f(x)## has a gap at ##x=0##. It is called a removable singularity, because we can insert just one point and get ##g(x)##.
 
To fully define a function you have to define its domain and codomain. If you say the domain of g is the whole set of real numbers then f and g will be different. But that is not the only choice. You can define both f and g only for positive real x for example, and make them identical.
 
Okay. Thanks a lot. That really helps.
 
But why can I still plot the point at origin intersecting with f(x) in Desmos (a graphing calculator)?
 
It might simplify the expression before determining its possible domain.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top