Determining & Proving Inverse Functions: Methodology?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on methodologies for determining and proving whether a function has an inverse, including considerations of bijections and the expressibility of inverses in terms of elementary functions. The scope includes theoretical aspects and conceptual clarifications related to inverse functions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about existing methodologies for determining if a function has an inverse.
  • Another participant suggests that determining if a function is a bijection may be a key criterion.
  • A third participant introduces the "horizontal line test" as a method to assess if a function is a bijection, linking it to the concept of inverse functions.
  • A follow-up question is raised regarding functions that are invertible but whose inverses cannot be expressed in terms of elementary functions, using the example of f(x) = x + sin(x) to illustrate this point.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to agree on the importance of bijections and the horizontal line test in determining invertibility, but the discussion remains unresolved regarding the general method for proving that an inverse cannot be expressed in terms of elementary functions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not clarify the assumptions underlying the definitions of bijections or elementary functions, nor does it resolve the question of proving the non-expressibility of certain inverses.

jgens
Gold Member
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
50
Does anyone know of an existing methodology for determining and proving whether or not a function has an inverse?

Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
How about by determining if the function is a bijection? Or am I missing something here?
 
The "horizontal line test". How many times does any horizontal line cross the graph of the function? Which is the same as "determining if the function is a bijection"!
 
Thank you very much. Just a brief follow up question: Suppose a function is invertable but the inverse has no representation in terms of elementary functions (I'm including trigonometric and logarithmic functions in this category) - I think f(x) = x + sin(x) would meet this criterion - is there a general method for proving that the function does not have an inverse expressable in terms of elementary functions?

Sorry if that doesn't make sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
13K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K