How Can We Prove Equipotence for Non-Empty Sets?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jetoso
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the concept of equipotence for non-empty sets, specifically focusing on the properties of bijections. Participants explore the definitions and implications of equipotence, including self-equipotence, symmetry, and transitivity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the identity function serves as a bijection for a set with itself, questioning the need for a more formal proof.
  • Another participant suggests that the inverse function can be used to demonstrate that if A is equipotent with B, then B is equipotent with A.
  • A third participant states that the composition of two bijections results in another bijection, prompting a request for a formal proof of this property.
  • One participant argues that the first two points are trivial, asserting that a function is bijective if and only if it is invertible, and that the identity function is inherently invertible.
  • This participant also claims that if two functions are invertible, their composition is also invertible, suggesting that writing down the inverse would suffice to demonstrate this.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of formal proofs for the properties of equipotence. While some find the initial claims straightforward, others seek more rigorous justification.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not reached a consensus on the level of formality required for the proofs, and there is an ongoing discussion about the definitions and implications of bijections.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in set theory, mathematical proofs, and the properties of functions may find this discussion relevant.

jetoso
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I am trying to prove the following about equipotence:
Let A and B be nonempty sets. We say that A is equipotent with B if there is a bijection between A and B. Then the following hold:
(i) A is equipotent with itself.
(ii) If A is equipotent with B, then B is equipotent with A.
(iii) If A is equipotent with B, and B is equipotent with C, then A is equipotent with C.

Proof:
(i) We can use the identity function Id_A which gives a bijection between A and itself. Shall I need a more formal proof here?

(ii) Let f: A -> B be a 1-1 and onto map. We can use the inverse function f^-1 which will give a bijection between B and A. Same question here, how to give formal proof.

(iii) Let f:A->B, g:B->C be 1-1 and onto. Then the composition h=(g o f) will give a 1-1 and onto map from A onto C. How do you give a formal proof of this?


Hope you guys have some suggestions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i. define the trivial function f(A)=A
ii. if f(a)=b then f-1(b)=a
iii. if f(a)=b g(b)=c then f.g(a)=c
 
Thanks
 
I do'nt see what you consider to be 'not formal' about the first two. A function is bijective if and only if it is invertible. Thus (i) and (ii) are trivialities - the identity is invertible, and the inverse of an invertible function is invertible.

The third is again simple - if f and g are invertible then so is fg, and to prove so you just write down the inverse and explain why it satisfies the definition of 'inverse'.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K