Invert a triple composite function p(q(r(x)))

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the inversion of a composite function represented as ##p(q(r(x)))##, specifically focusing on the relationships between bijective functions and their inverses. Participants explore the implications of manipulating these functions and seek clarity on the justification of their procedures, which involves theoretical aspects of function composition and inversion.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant introduces the concept of bijective functions and their composition, stating that if ##f = h_1 \circ g \circ h_0##, then ##g = h^{-1}_1 \circ f \circ h^{-1}_0##, but questions how to proceed from this relationship.
  • Another participant suggests using a method involving equal functions to derive the relationship between the functions, but expresses uncertainty about justifying this approach.
  • There is a proposal to define two functions, ##A(x) = h^{-1}f(h(x))## and ##B(x) = g(h^{-1}(h(x)))##, and to show their equivalence by demonstrating they have the same domain and range.
  • A participant points out a typo in the previous messages regarding the notation of the functions and requests clarity in the use of subscripts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty about the justification of their mathematical procedures and do not reach a consensus on the best approach to prove the relationships between the functions. Multiple viewpoints on how to proceed with the proof remain present.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the need for prior materials or theorems that may support their proposed methods, indicating a reliance on existing knowledge that may not be fully articulated in the discussion.

infk
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Hey,
Let ##(f,g) \in B^A## where ##A## and ##B## are non-empty sets, ##B^A## denotes the set of bijective functions between ##A## and ##B##.
We assume that there exists ##h_0: A \rightarrow A## and ##h_1: B \rightarrow B## such that ##f = h_1 \circ g \circ h_0 ##.
This implies that ##g = h^{-1}_1 \circ f \circ h^{-1}_0##, according to my teacher, but why is that?
We have that ##h^{-1}_1 \circ f = g \circ h^{-1}_0 ##, but how do I proceed from that?

I have drawn a graph with sets and arrows representing functions such that going from ##A## to ##B## via ##h_0##, ##g## and ##h_1## is the same as going from ##A## to ##B## via ##f##. I then manipulated this graph a little while maintaining the proper relations between the sets, which showed that going from ##A## to ##B## via ##g## is the same as going through (in order) ##h^{-1}_0##, ##f## and ##h^{-1}_1##, but this is hardly a proof at all.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
infk said:
We have that ##h^{-1}_1 \circ f = g \circ h^{-1}_0 ##, but how do I proceed from that?

Using magic and superstition, if we begin with the equation h(x) = h(x) and apply "equal functions" to both sides of that equation then we can get to h^{-1}( f ( h(x)) = g(h^{-1}(h(x)) = g(x). The problem is how to justify that procedure.


Your materials may have proven that procedure as a theorem. We'd need to see those materials in order to find an easy proof. Are you asking for some "slick" way of proving the result?

A knockdown-drag-out roof could begin: "Consider the two functions A(x) = h^{-1}f( h(x)) and B(x) = g(h^{-1}(h(x)) ."

If A(x) = y then show that x = h((f^{-1}(h^{-1}(x)). Use that expression for x to show that B(x) = y also. In a similar manner show that if B(x) = y then A(x) = y. Argue that A(x) and B(x) have the same domain and range. Thus they are identical functions.

.
 
Stephen Tashi said:
Using magic and superstition, if we begin with the equation h(x) = h(x) and apply "equal functions" to both sides of that equation then we can get to h^{-1}( f ( h(x)) = g(h^{-1}(h(x)) = g(x). The problem is how to justify that procedure.Your materials may have proven that procedure as a theorem. We'd need to see those materials in order to find an easy proof. Are you asking for some "slick" way of proving the result?

A knockdown-drag-out roof could begin: "Consider the two functions A(x) = h^{-1}f( h(x)) and B(x) = g(h^{-1}(h(x)) ."

If A(x) = y then show that x = h((f^{-1}(h^{-1}(x)). Use that expression for x to show that B(x) = y also. In a similar manner show that if B(x) = y then A(x) = y. Argue that A(x) and B(x) have the same domain and range. Thus they are identical functions.

.
Hi and thanks for the response. What I meant was of course that ##h^{-1}_1 \circ f = g \circ h_0##, it seems though that you did not notice my typo. Also, could you use subscript notation, it is not clear which of ##h_1## and ##h_2## you mean. Cheers
 
Last edited:
Using magic and superstition, if we begin with the equation h_0^{-1}(x) = h_0^{-1}(x) and apply "equal functions" to both sides of that equation then we can get to h_1^{-1}( f ( h_0^{-1}(x)) = g(h_0(h_0^{-1}(x)) = g(x). The problem is how to justify that procedure.

Your materials may have proven that procedure as a theorem. We'd need to see those materials in order to find an easy proof. Are you asking for some "slick" way of proving the result?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K