Can you take the inverse of any function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZeroPivot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Inverse
AI Thread Summary
Not every function has an inverse, and even if it does, the process of finding it varies in complexity. The inverse of an integral is generally not the same as the integral of the inverse of a function. For continuous functions with inverses, switching the integral and its inverse does not yield the same result. Specifically, integrating a function like y = 2x + 1 and then attempting to take the inverse of that integral will not relate to the original function's inverse. Understanding these concepts is crucial for proper application in calculus.
ZeroPivot
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
i know when you are dealing with limits you can take the inverse to fit the standard limit equations.

how about integrals? can u take the inverse for instance: integral(f(x)dx)

turn it into integral((1/f(x))dx)^-1) get the answer and then reverse it back?

when can u or can't you take the inverse?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
First, not every function has an inverse. But if a function has an inverse, then, theoretically, you can find it. Exactly how you would find that inverse and how hard it would be depends on the function.

Do you have some specific reason for asking about the inverse of an integral? In general the inverse of the integral of a function is NOT the integral of the inverse of the function. Your last expression has an unmatched right parenthesis so it is hard to tell exactly what you intend.
 
lets say the fuction is continuous and has an inverse.

something easy say y=2x+1 and u want the integral integral(2x+1)dx can u switch it around and say (integral(1/(2x+1))dx)^-1, are there any integrals u can do this to or is it a no no?
 
ZeroPivot said:
lets say the fuction is continuous and has an inverse.

something easy say y=2x+1 and u want the integral integral(2x+1)dx can u switch it around and say (integral(1/(2x+1))dx)^-1, are there any integrals u can do this to or is it a no no?

Integrate that and see what you get. It'll have nothing to do with the inverse of y = 2x+1.
 
ZeroPivot said:
i know when you are dealing with limits you can take the inverse to fit the standard limit equations.

how about integrals? can u take the inverse for instance: integral(f(x)dx)

turn it into integral((1/f(x))dx)^-1) get the answer and then reverse it back?

when can u or can't you take the inverse?
You can take the inverse of any function. (pause for shock value :-p)

HOWEVER, it is important to note that the inverse of a function is not necessarily a function. For example, consider the ##\sin## function. Since ##\sin(x)=\sin(x+2\pi)##, ##\sin^{-1}(\sin(x))## will not be unique. In fact, ##\sin^{-1}(\sin(x))=x+2\pi n##, where ##n\in\mathbb{Z}##.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top