Proofs for Two Sets of Questions

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving various properties of functions and sets, specifically addressing questions related to set theory and function mappings. Participants are seeking assistance with proofs related to subsets, intersections, and properties of functions such as injectivity and surjectivity.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant shares progress on a specific question involving function mappings and set operations, noting that f(A)/f(B) results in an empty set while f(A/B) yields {1,2}.
  • Another participant outlines standard methods for proving set relationships, emphasizing the definitions of subsets and set equality, and provides an example involving the intersection of sets.
  • A different participant discusses the nature of functions, stating that if all elements of two sets A and B are different, the image of their union equals the sum of their individual images.
  • Further elaboration is provided on how to handle cases where elements of A and B overlap, suggesting the use of subsets to clarify the relationships between the sets.
  • Two participants inquire about proving that if A is a subset of B, then f(A) is a subset of f(B), indicating a need for clarification on this proof.
  • One participant suggests a method for proving the subset relationship by taking an arbitrary element from f(A) and demonstrating its presence in f(B), while also advising against reviving an old thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on how to approach the proofs, with no consensus reached on the specific methods or conclusions. Multiple competing approaches and interpretations of the problems are present.

Contextual Notes

Some participants' arguments depend on specific definitions and assumptions about functions and set operations, which may not be universally accepted or clarified within the discussion.

TheMathsDude
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hey guys,

I've got two sets of questions here both requiring proofs.

Here is a little progress I made with Question Two part c)
f=({a,1},{b,1},{c,2},{d,2}) , A={a,c} & B={b,d}
f(A)/f(B) = emptyset & f(A/B)={1,2}

Any help with the other two parts to Question Two/Three would be great.

Many Thanks,
The Maths Dude
 

Attachments

  • maths1.JPG
    maths1.JPG
    27.8 KB · Views: 535
  • maths2.JPG
    maths2.JPG
    32.6 KB · Views: 555
Physics news on Phys.org
For problem 1, two parts ask you to prove a set is subset of another set and one asks you to prove two sets are equal. The standard method is to use the definitions: A is a subset of B if and only if every member of A is a member of B. Two sets A and B are equal if each is a subset of the other: if every member of A is a member of B and vice-versa.

For example, the second question that f(A intersect B) is a subset of f(A) intersect f(B). Okay, start by saying "If y is in f(A intersect) then there exist x in A intersect B such that y= f(x). Since x is in A intersect B, then either x is in A or x is in B. If x is in A, then f(x)= y is in f(A) and so in f(A) intersect f(B). If x is in A, then f(x)= y is in f(B) and so in f(A) intersect f(B).

The second problem asks about "injective" and "surjective": use the definitions! A function, f:A->B is injective (also called "one to one") if and only if f(x)= f(y) only if x= y. f:A->B is surjective (also called "onto") if and only if for every y in B, there exist x in A such that f(x)= y.

For example, with f:A->B, g:B-> C, a) i) asks you to prove "If g o f is injective, then f is injective."
I might do this by "indirect proof" or "proof by contradiction". Suppose f is not injective. Then there exist x, y in A, [itex]x\ne y[/itex], such that f(x)= f(y) (in B). Call that common value u: f(x)= f(y)= u. Since g is a function, g(u) is a single value. Call that v. Then g o f(x)= g(f(x))= g(u)= v and g o f(y)= g(f(y))= g(u)= v. That is, g o f(x)= g o f(y) contradicting the fact that g o f is injective.

The second part of this is basically the same except that we have "is NOT injective" or "is NOT surjective". Use the fact that the contrapositive of a theorem is true if and only if the theorem is true. The contrapositive of the statement "if p then q" is "if NOT q then NOT p". The contrapositive of the statement "if NOT p then NOT q" is "if q then p".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
supose [tex]A =\left\{a_1,a_2,a_3,...,a_n\right\} \ and \ B=\left\{b_1,b_2,b_3,...,b_m\right\}[/tex]

the elements of [tex]A\cup B[/tex] are the domain of the function, while the elements of [tex]f(A\cup B)[/tex] are obviously the image

definition of function:

For each element of the domain there are only one element of the image
for any element of the image there is one or more than one element of the domain

Now its easy to see that if all elements of A and B are different, the image of A + the image of B = the image of [tex]A\cup B[/tex].

For the equal elements, if [tex]a_i = b_j[/tex] for some i,j = 1,2,3,4,5..., they must have the same image

Now its easy to see that if all elements of A and B are the same, the image of A + the image of B = the image of [tex]A\cup B[/tex].
 
To make more clear, if some of the elements of A and B are equal, and some of them are different, we can think in 3 different sub-sets such that the sub-set C contain only the elements in A that are not in B, the subset D contain only the elements in both A and B, and the sub-set E contain only the elements that are not in A.

[tex]A\cup B = C\cup D\cup E[/tex] and by the definitions above you are able to conclude that [tex]f(A\cup B) = f(A) + f(B)[/tex]
 
How do we prove:
If A is a subset of B then f(A) is subset of f(B) ?
 
How do we prove:
If A is a subset of B then f(A) is subset of f(B) ?
 
Take an arbitrary element of f(A) and show that it's in f(B). Also, please make your own thread, instead of bumping one that's over 2 years old.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K