MHB Finding inverse of F in Munkres' Topology Ch.2 EX 5 pg 106

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

In Munkres' "Topology" (Second Edition), the function $$F(x) = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}$$ is analyzed for its inverse. To find the inverse, set $$y = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}$$ and solve the resulting quadratic equation $$yx^2 + x - y = 0$$. The solution for $$x$$ is $$x = \frac{-1 + \sqrt{1 + 4y^2}}{2y}$$, which aligns with Munkres' formula for $$G(y)$$ after rationalizing the denominator. This process confirms that $$F$$ is a homeomorphism, providing a comprehensive understanding of the example.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of homeomorphisms in topology
  • Familiarity with quadratic equations
  • Knowledge of rationalizing denominators
  • Basic proficiency in algebraic manipulation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of homeomorphisms in topology
  • Learn about quadratic equations and their solutions
  • Explore rationalization techniques in algebra
  • Examine additional examples of function inverses in topology
USEFUL FOR

Students of topology, mathematicians interested in function analysis, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of homeomorphisms and function inverses.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
In Munkres book "Topology" (Second Edition), Munkres proves that a function F is a homeomorphism ...

I need help in determining how to find the inverse of $$F$$ ... so that I feel I have a full understanding of all aspects of the example ...

Example 5 reads as follows:View attachment 4193Wishing to understand all aspects of the problem I tried to see how given

$$ F(x) = \frac{x}{1 - x^2} $$

one could determine the inverse of $$F$$ (and then come up with $$G$$, as Munkres did ... ... somehow ??) ... ...I think I proceed by putting

$$y = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}$$

and solving for $$x$$ ... ... BUT how exactly do I proceed (I got nowhere with this problem!)Can someone please help?NOTE... I realize that being able to determine the inverse of F and show it is G is not strictly necessary in showing that F is a homeomorphism ... BUT ... I feel very dissatisfied that I cannot see exactly how this works ... so, again, I hope someone can help ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
I tried to see how given

$$ F(x) = \frac{x}{1 - x^2} $$

one could determine the inverse of $$F$$ (and then come up with $$G$$, as Munkres did ... ... somehow ??) ... ...I think I proceed by putting

$$y = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}$$

and solving for $$x$$
If $$y = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}$$ then $yx^2 + x - y = 0$. Solving that quadratic equation for $x$, you get $x = \dfrac{-1 \pm\sqrt{1+4y^2}}{2y}$. You want the solution for which $x\in (-1,1)$, which means that you need the $+$ sign for the square root: $x = \dfrac{-1 + \sqrt{1+4y^2}}{2y}$. That looks different from the formula that Munkres gives for $G(y)$, but if you rationalise the denominator of his formula (multiplying top and bottom of his fraction by $-1 + \sqrt{1+4y^2}$) then you see that the two solutions are equivalent.
 
Opalg said:
If $$y = \frac{x}{1 - x^2}$$ then $yx^2 + x - y = 0$. Solving that quadratic equation for $x$, you get $x = \dfrac{-1 \pm\sqrt{1+4y^2}}{2y}$. You want the solution for which $x\in (-1,1)$, which means that you need the $+$ sign for the square root: $x = \dfrac{-1 + \sqrt{1+4y^2}}{2y}$. That looks different from the formula that Munkres gives for $G(y)$, but if you rationalise the denominator of his formula (multiplying top and bottom of his fraction by $-1 + \sqrt{1+4y^2}$) then you see that the two solutions are equivalent.
Thanks Opalg ... quite straightforward really... Another case of "easy when you know how" ...

Thanks again for your support and help with this problem ...

Peter
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K