MHB G o F = {(1,3)(2,2)(3,2)(4,2)(5,5)(1,1)(2,3)(3,4)(4,5)(5,2)}

  • Thread starter Thread starter JProgrammer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition
AI Thread Summary
The composition of functions F and G, denoted as F o G, is defined by applying G first and then F to the results. The correct result for F o G is {(1, 3), (2, 2), (3, 2), (4, 5), (5, 2)}, not the initial set proposed. Each output is derived from the sequential application of the functions to their respective inputs. Understanding this composition is crucial for further discussions, such as finding G o F. The thread emphasizes the importance of grasping function composition in relation to inverse functions.
JProgrammer
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
So I have the following:

F = {(1,3)(2,2)(3,2)(4,2)(5,5)}
G = {(1,1)(2,3)(3,4)(4,5)(5,2)}

Am I right in saying that F o G would be:

F o G = {(1,3)(2,2)(3,2)(4,2)(5,5)(1,1)(2,3)(3,4)(4,5)(5,2)}

If not, does F o G actually mean?

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JProgrammer said:
So I have the following:

F = {(1,3)(2,2)(3,2)(4,2)(5,5)}
G = {(1,1)(2,3)(3,4)(4,5)(5,2)}

Am I right in saying that F o G would be:

F o G = {(1,3)(2,2)(3,2)(4,2)(5,5)(1,1)(2,3)(3,4)(4,5)(5,2)}

If not, does F o G actually mean?

Thank you.
No that is not right. Surely there was a definition of the "composition" of two functions where you first met this concept? (You had, I believe, earlier posted this same "F" asking about F^{-1}. How could you possibly be dealing with inverse functions without knowing what "composition" is? The inverse function is defined by 'F o F^{-1}(x)= F^{-1}o F(x)= x for all x'.)

In any case, we can interpret "F = {(1,3)(2,2)(3,2)(4,2)(5,5)}" as meaning that F(1)= 3, F(2)= 2, F(3)= 2, F(4)= 2, and F(5)= 5. G= {(1,1)(2,3)(3,4)(4,5)(5,2)} can be interpreted a meaning that G(1)= 1, G(2)= 3, G(3)= 4, G(4)= 5, and G(5)= 2.

"F o G" means "to each x, first apply G, then apply F to that". Starting with x= 1, G(1)= 1 and F(1)= 3 so F o G(1)= 3. G(2)= 3 and F(3)= 2 so F o G(2)= 2. G(3)= 4 and F(4)= 2 so F o G(3)= 2. G(4)= 5 and F(5)= 5 so F o G(4)= 5. G(5)= 2 and F(2)= 2 so F o G(5)= 2. Written as a set of pairs, F o G= {(1, 3), (2, 2), (3, 2), (4, 5), (5, 2)}.

Now, can you use that to find G o F?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top