Can the Floor Function Be Described as an Invertible Function?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter flouran
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Inverse
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of the floor function, particularly whether it can be described as an invertible function. Participants explore mathematical expressions involving the floor function and its relationship with modular arithmetic, while also considering the implications of defining inverses for non-injective functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that since the floor function can be expressed in terms of other mathematical functions, it might be possible to define an inverse for it.
  • Another participant argues against the possibility of inverting the floor function, stating that multiple values of x correspond to the same floor value, thus preventing it from being invertible.
  • A different approach is proposed to solve a modular equation using the floor function, with one participant expressing confidence in finding a solution through manipulation of the equation.
  • Concerns are raised about the use of trigonometric functions to express the floor function, with a warning that such representations may complicate problem-solving rather than aid it.
  • Participants engage in a discussion about the clarity of communication and the importance of tone when providing mathematical assistance.
  • One participant clarifies their intent, stating they are not seeking to find an inverse but rather to express the mod function in terms of the floor function for problem-solving purposes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the floor function can be considered invertible. There are competing views on the utility of expressing the floor function in terms of trigonometric functions, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to solving the modular equation.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of confidence in their mathematical expressions and reasoning. There are indications of frustration related to communication and understanding of mathematical concepts, which may affect the clarity of the discussion.

flouran
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
Hi Guys,
I was wondering, since (a)mod(n) can be written in terms of the floor function, thus [tex]a - n Floor[\frac{n}{a}],[/tex] and therefore, can't we describe the floor function as an invertible function? I know that [tex]Floor[x] = -1/2 + x + \frac{ArcTan(Cot(\pi x))}{\pi}[/tex]. Thus, can't we inverse this formula? Furthermore, there is another idea that works on any function, but deals with sets. In general, given a function f: A → B and a subset S of B, then f-1(S) = {x ∈ A | f(x) ∈ S}. In the case of the floor function, if n is an integer, then floor-1({n}) = [n, n + 1). Note that these are sets, not numbers.

Please let me know as I am saying these things right off of the top of my head.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Ok, so if I have (2x)mod(x+1) = 9, then can't I find x?
Can't I find x by saying that, [tex]2x-(x+1)(Floor[\frac{2x}{x+1}])=9[/tex]
Equivalently, [tex]2x-(x+1)(-1/2 + \frac{2x}{x+1} + \frac{ArcTan(Cot(\pi (\frac{2x}{x+1})))}{\pi} )=9[/tex].

Thus, can't I solve for x from there?
 
Last edited:
I invite you to try to find an inverse of
[tex]\operatorname{floor}(x) = -1/2 + x + \frac{\arctan(\cot \pi x)}{\pi}.[/tex]
Hint: you can't, because multiple values of x correspond to the same floor value.

If you're trying to solve 2x mod x + 1 = 9, you're approaching the problem in completely the wrong way. Instead of just writing out expressions for the mod function, why not use your brain?

For example: In general, 0 ≤ x mod y < y. Thus, in that equation, 2x mod x + 1 = 9 < x + 1, so x > 8. Then, x + 1 < 2x < 2(x + 1), which means that 2x mod x + 1 = 2x - (x + 1) = 9. Solving that gives x = 10. Notice that there is a unique solution to the equation.

Your formula isn't even right; the correct one is this: a mod n = a - n floor(a / n).
 
I don't mean to be rude, adriank, but when you said, "Your formula isn't even right; the correct one is this: a mod n = a - n floor(a / n).", using the word "this" without a noun following it is grammatically incorrect. Thus, if you really want to help someone out, try to utilize a more eloquent tone, but most importantly, know your grammatical dogma well.
 
I'm sorry if my tone isn't very nice, and I don't mean to be rude either, but it does get a little frustrating when, after attempting to explain numerous times, you just don't understand that what can't be done can't be done, no matter how cleverly you try and go about doing it. If you have a function that gives the same value for multiple inputs, there is no way of defining its inverse function, no matter how you write the function.

If you're trying to get Mathematica or similar to solve something for you, you have to know how to interpret the result. Just because it can give you something using just trigonometric functions doesn't mean you can use those blindly; you have to be aware that what it gives you depends crucially on the fact that arctan is really a multi-valued function, and the particular function ArcTan in Mathematica uses its principal value, so in that sense ArcTan is not a true inverse of Tan. If you really do try to manipulate expressions such as ArcTan[Cot[x]], you have to be extremely careful. (ArcTan[Cot[x]] is the same as ArcTan[Tan[Pi/2 - x]], which is in general not Pi/2 - x, because Tan is not one-to-one.)

I'm really just trying to deter you from trying to express, say, the floor function as some other thing involving trigonometric or exponential functions and whatnot, since they are typically much less useful (and harder to work with). In your question (solve 2x mod x + 1 = 9), you might be able to get somewhere by rewriting it as 2x - (x + 1)floor(2x / (x + 1)) = 9, but making a bigger mess out of it by rewriting floor using arctan and cot isn't going to help you solve it.

As for my grammar, there is a noun following "this", and that is the equation. Regardless, even if you find that grammatically strange, there is no chance of misunderstanding and it's still very clear. I could have picked apart your grammar in many places, but I didn't because it would be quite irrelevant to the discussion.

I'm sorry if I was rude in my last post. I was just trying to get you see that there are better ways of approaching problems like that.

I'm kind of curious: what's your goal with writing out the floor function, etc. in terms of other functions?
 
An equation is not a noun, it is an expression that equates two or more ideas with one another. Besides, a noun is a linguistic concept not a mathematical one.

Regardless, I am sorry for getting somewhat frustrated with you. I am not stupid; I do realize that expressing the mod function in terms of the floor function and then expressing the floor function in terms of the trigonometric function is difficult (not to mention impractical).

Thus, do not take it the wrong way, I am not mad at you. In fact, I am thankful that you have been willing to help me. It's just that I want to be able to solve for problems such as, (2x)mod(x+1) = 9, and it has become so frustrating for me. I sincerely apologize for my behavior.

Now, back to the math. The main reason why I want to solve such problems is for fun. I enjoy mathematics. Also, I may have incorrectly worded my last post. I don't mean to find the inverse of the floor or mod functions (because they do not pass the vertical line test and therefore aren't one-to-one), but I just thought that by representing the mod function in terms of the floor function and then representing the floor function as trigonometric function, I can solve for x (without having to find the inverse function).

I guess that's my logic behind this whole problem, and again, I am sorry if I came off angry at you. I am frustrated with the problem, not you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K