Is g(f) One-to-One if f is Not One-to-One? Prove It.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proof that the composition of two functions, g(f), is not one-to-one if the function f is not one-to-one. It is established that if f: A -> B is not one-to-one, there exist distinct elements x1 and x2 in the domain of f such that f(x1) = f(x2). Consequently, for any function g: B -> C, if g is one-to-one, it follows that g(f(x1)) = g(f(x2)), confirming that g(f) cannot be one-to-one. Thus, the conclusion is that g(f) is not one-to-one without needing to assume any properties of g beyond its mapping.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of function composition
  • Knowledge of one-to-one (injective) functions
  • Familiarity with mathematical notation and proofs
  • Basic concepts of set theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of injective functions in detail
  • Learn about function composition and its implications
  • Explore counterexamples in function theory
  • Investigate the relationship between injective and surjective functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and students studying advanced algebra or discrete mathematics who seek to understand the implications of function properties in proofs.

major_maths
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
1. Assume that f : A -> B and g : B -> C and that f is not one
to one. Prove that g(f) is not one to one.

2. one-to-one: x1 != x2 and f(x1) != f(x2)
not one-to-one: f(x1)=f(x2) and x1 != x2

3. The start of the proof should go as follows:

Assume f: A->B, g: B -> C, f is not 1-1, g is 1-1.
Since f is not 1-1, there exists an x1 and an x2 in the dom(f) such that f(x1) = f(x2) and x1 != x2.
Since g is 1-1, for every x1 and x2 in dom(f), if x1 != x2 then g(x1) != g(x2).

And that's as far as I got. I'm not sure if I should assume g is 1-1 since that's not explicitly in the instructions, but I don't thing g(f) could be 1-1 if g wasn't 1-1. I tried plugging f(x1) into g but I couldn't find a logical way to get to the conclusion by doing that.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't need to assume anything about g, do you? If f(x1)=f(x2) then g(f(x1))=g(f(x2)), yes? What does that tell you about g(f)?
 
Last edited:
Oh. It tells me that g(f) is not one-to-one. But if that's the case, shouldn't f(x1) = f(x2)? I thought that that was the other part of the definition of not being one-to-one, that if the inputs are different then the outputs should be the same. And since f(x1) and f(x2) are the inputs in this case, shouldn't they be equal?
 
major_maths said:
Oh. It tells me that g(f) is not one-to-one. But if that's the case, shouldn't f(x1) = f(x2)? I thought that that was the other part of the definition of not being one-to-one, that if the inputs are different then the outputs should be the same. And since f(x1) and f(x2) are the inputs in this case, shouldn't they be equal?

I'm really not sure I understand that. Sure, g(f) is not one-to-one. But what 'other part of not being one-to-one' are talking about? If two different inputs give the same output then it's not one-to-one. There is no other part of NOT being one-to-one.
 
Like Dick said, you don't need g to be not 1-1 to obtain the solution. From the hypothesis, there exist x1 and x2 such that f(x1) = f(x2), where f(x1) and f(x2) are members of B. Since g maps B to C, then g is...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K