MHB How Can We Prove Two Open Intervals in $\mathbb{R}$ Are Equinumerous?

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    intervals
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving that any two open intervals in $\mathbb{R}$ are equinumerous by establishing a bijection between them. A proposed function, \( f(t) = (1-t)a + tb \), is examined for its injectivity and surjectivity. The participants confirm that if \( a \neq b \), the function is injective, and they derive a method to show surjectivity by solving for \( x \) in terms of \( y \). The conclusion reached is that the function successfully demonstrates the cardinality equivalence of the intervals, affirming that \( (0,1) \) and \( (a,b) \) are indeed equinumerous. This establishes a solid understanding of the relationship between open intervals in real numbers.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

Each two open intervals in $\mathbb{R}$ are equinumerous.

It suffices to show that for each $a,b \in \mathbb{R}$ with $a<b$ it holds that $(0,1) \sim (a,b)$
$$f: (0,1) \xrightarrow[\text{surjective}]{\text{1-1}} (a,b)$$
$$f(t)=(1-t)a+b, t \in (0,1)$$

So this means for example that $(2,9) \sim (-5,100)$, right?
What surjective and 1-1 $f: (2,9) \to (-5,100)$ could we pick in order to show that these two intervals have the same cardinality? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
$$f: (0,1) \xrightarrow[\text{surjective}]{\text{1-1}} (a,b)$$
$$f(t)=(1-t)a+b, t \in (0,1)$$
It should be $f(t)=(1-t)a+tb$.

evinda said:
What surjective and 1-1 $f: (2,9) \to (-5,100)$ could we pick in order to show that these two intervals have the same cardinality?
You have two bijections: $f_1:(0,1)\to (2,9)$ and $f_2:(0,1) \to (-5,100)$. Then $f_2\circ f_1^{-1}: (2,9) \to (-5,100)$ is also a bijection.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
It should be $f(t)=(1-t)a+tb$.

Oh yes, right! (Nod)
Evgeny.Makarov said:
You have two bijections: $f_1: (0,1)\to (2,9)$ and $f_2: (0,1) \to (-5,100)$. Then $f_2\circ f_1^{-1}: (2,9) \to (-5,100)$ is also a bijection.

I see... Could we prove like that that $f$ is injective? (Thinking)

Let $x_1, x_2 \in (0,1)$ with $x_1 \neq x_2$.

$$x_1 \neq x_2 \Rightarrow bx_1 \neq bx_2 $$

$$x_1 \neq x_2 \Rightarrow -x_1 \neq -x_2 \Rightarrow 1-x_1 \neq 1-x_2 \Rightarrow (1-x_1) a \neq (1-x_2) a$$

$$\Rightarrow (1-x_1)a+x_1 b \neq (1-x_2)a+x_2b \Rightarrow f(x_1) \neq f(x_2)$$In order to prove that $f$ is surjective, we want to prove that $\forall y \in (a,b), \exists x \in (0,1)$ such that $f(x)=y \Rightarrow (1-x)a+xb=y$.
But how could we do this? (Thinking)
 
evinda said:
Could we prove like that that $f$ is injective? (Thinking)

Let $x_1, x_2 \in (0,1)$ with $x_1 \neq x_2$.

$$x_1 \neq x_2 \Rightarrow bx_1 \neq bx_2 $$
This does not follow if $b=0$.

evinda said:
$$x_1 \neq x_2 \Rightarrow -x_1 \neq -x_2 \Rightarrow 1-x_1 \neq 1-x_2 \Rightarrow (1-x_1) a \neq (1-x_2) a$$
Again, the last implication does not hold if $a=0$.

evinda said:
$$\Rightarrow (1-x_1)a+x_1 b \neq (1-x_2)a+x_2b \Rightarrow f(x_1) \neq f(x_2)$$
And this does no hold at all. If you know that $a_1\ne a_2$ and $b_1\ne b_2$, it does not follow that $a_1+b_1\ne a_2+b_2$.

evinda said:
In order to prove that $f$ is surjective, we want to prove that $\forall y \in (a,b), \exists x \in (0,1)$ such that $f(x)=y \Rightarrow (1-x)a+xb=y$.
But how could we do this?
Have you tried solving a linear equation? This could help in proving injection as well.
 
If $a=0 \wedge b=0$ then we wouldn't take the function $f(t)=(1-t)a+tb$ since it wouldn't be injective, right?
In this case we could take the function $f(x)=x$, right?Now if $b=0, a \neq 0$ then $f(t)=(1-t)a$.

We pick $x_1, x_2 \in (0,1) $ with $x_1 \neq x_2$.

$x_1 \neq x_2 \Rightarrow -x_1 \neq -x_2 \Rightarrow 1-x_1 \neq 1-x_2 \Rightarrow (1-x_1) a \neq (1-x_2)a \Rightarrow f(x_1) \neq f(x_2)$

Now if $a=0, b \neq 0$ then $f(t)=tb$

We pick $x_1, x_2 \in (0,1) $ with $x_1 \neq x_2$.$x_1 \neq x_2 \Rightarrow bx_1 \neq bx_2 \Rightarrow f(x_1) \neq f(x_2)$

Now we consider the case $a \neq 0, b \neq 0$.

We pick $x_1, x_2 \in (0,1) $ with $x_1 \neq x_2$.

Suppose that $f(x_1)=f(x_2) \Rightarrow (1-x_1)a+bx_1=(1-x_2)b+b x_2 \Rightarrow b(x_1-x_2)=a(x_1-x_2) \overset{x_1 \neq x_2}{\Rightarrow} a=b$

When $a=b$ then $f(t)=a$ and that would mean that $f$ is not surjective, but we will show that it is.$$(1-x)a+xb=y \Rightarrow a-xa+xb=y \Rightarrow (b-a)x+a=y$$

$$a<y<b \Rightarrow a<(b-a)x+a<b \Rightarrow 0<(b-a)x<b$$Can we use this inequality to show that $f$ is surjective? (Thinking)
 
$(0,1)$ and $(a,b)$ are not equinumerous when $a=b$.

evinda said:
We pick $x_1, x_2 \in (0,1) $ with $x_1 \neq x_2$.

Suppose that $f(x_1)=f(x_2) \Rightarrow (1-x_1)a+bx_1=(1-x_2)b+b x_2 \Rightarrow b(x_1-x_2)=a(x_1-x_2) \overset{x_1 \neq x_2}{\Rightarrow} a=b$
This is a proof of injectivity when $a\ne b$ regardless of whether $a=0$ or $b=0$.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
$(0,1)$ and $(a,b)$ are not equinumerous when $a=b$.

Oh yes, right! (Nod)

Evgeny.Makarov said:
This is a proof of injectivity when $a\ne b$ regardless of whether $a=0$ or $b=0$.
It always holds that $a \neq b$, so doing it like that we come to a contradiction, right? (Thinking)
 
Yes.
 
Nice! (Smile)

And could we prove like that that $f$ is surjective? (Thinking)We want to show that $\forall y \in (a,b) \exists x \in (0,1)$ such that $f(x)=y$.
$f(x)=y \Rightarrow (1-x)a+bx=y \Rightarrow a-ax+bx=y \Rightarrow (b-a)x=y-a \overset{b \neq a}{\Rightarrow} x=\frac{y-a}{b-a}$

$$a<y<b \Rightarrow 0<y-a<b-a \overset{b-a>0}{\Rightarrow} 0< \frac{y-a}{b-a}<1 \Rightarrow 0<x<1$$So we see that we have shown that what we wanted to, therefore $f$ is surjective.
 
  • #10
Yes, that's correct.
 
  • #11
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Yes, that's correct.

Great! Thank you very much! (Happy)
 
Back
Top