Prove 1 - 1: Prove Functions are 1 - 1

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JProgrammer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving whether specific functions are one-to-one (1-1). The first function, defined as F:R→R with F(x)={(x^2 for x≥0, -x^2 for x≤0), is confirmed to be 1-1 after clarifying that the second line uses (-x)^2, not -x^2. The second function, F:Z→Z with F(n)={(n-1 for n even, n^3 for n odd), is also established as 1-1. Participants emphasize the importance of precise definitions and logical proof structures in mathematical arguments.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of one-to-one functions in mathematics
  • Familiarity with piecewise function definitions
  • Knowledge of basic algebraic manipulation
  • Ability to construct mathematical proofs
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the formal definition of one-to-one functions and their properties
  • Learn how to construct proofs for piecewise functions
  • Explore examples of functions that are not one-to-one and analyze their characteristics
  • Review algebraic techniques for manipulating and simplifying expressions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding function properties and proof techniques in algebra and calculus.

JProgrammer
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
So I have to either prove that these functions are 1 - 1 or show a counter example to prove they are not. I believe that I have proven that these functions are 1 - 1, but I am not 100% sure:

For each of the following functions, either prove that the function is 1 – 1 or find a counterexample to show that the function is not 1 – 1.
F:R→R
F(x)={(x^2 for x≥0@〖-x〗^2 for x≤0)┤

This function is 1 -1

(x + 1)^2 = x^2 + x +1
-(x – 1)^2 = x^2 – 2x + 1
x^2 + x +1≠ x^2 – 2x + 1

F:Z→Z
F(n)={(n-1 for n even@n^3 for n odd)┤

This function is 1 – 1.

(n + 2) – 1
(n + 2)^3

n^3+6 n^2+12 n+8 ≠ n+1

Is my work sufficient for proving that the functions are 1 - 1? If not, how would I prove that they are 1 - 1? Or am I completely wrong and the functions are not 1 -1?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JProgrammer said:
F:R→R
F(x)={(x^2 for x≥0@〖-x〗^2 for x≤0)
So
\[
f(x)=
\begin{cases}
x^2,&x\ge0\\
(-x)^2,&x\le0
\end{cases}
\]
Are you sure the second line is not $-x^2$ when $x<0$?

JProgrammer said:
This function is 1 -1

(x + 1)^2 = x^2 + x +1
-(x – 1)^2 = x^2 – 2x + 1
x^2 + x +1≠ x^2 – 2x + 1
Why are you considering $(x+1)^2$ and $-(x-1)^2$? What do these expressions have to do with $f$ and the definition of 1-1 function? By the way, $-(x – 1)^2 = x^2 – 2x + 1$ is incorrect.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
So
\[
f(x)=
\begin{cases}
x^2,&x\ge0\\
(-x)^2,&x\le0
\end{cases}
\]
Are you sure the second line is not $-x^2$ when $x<0$?

Why are you considering $(x+1)^2$ and $-(x-1)^2$? What do these expressions have to do with $f$ and the definition of 1-1 function? By the way, $-(x – 1)^2 = x^2 – 2x + 1$ is incorrect.

I chose x + 1 because x needs to be greater than or equal to 0. I chose x - 1 because x needs to be less than or equal to zero.
 
JProgrammer said:
I chose x + 1 because x needs to be greater than or equal to 0. I chose x - 1 because x needs to be less than or equal to zero.
Sorry, this makes no sense. First, $x+1$ is not guaranteed to be positive: take $x=-2$ for example. Second, mathematics is all about precision in using definitions and in following the rules of proof. The concept of 1-1 function is not a metaphor; it's a precise statement. Namely, $f$ is 1-1 if for all $x_1$ and $x_2$, the fact that $f(x_1)=f(x_2)$ implies $x_1=x_2$. A proof of statements starting with "For all $z$" usually starts with "Consider an arbitrary $z$". In this case, you consider arbitrary $x_1$ and $x_2$. You are not allowed to assume whether they are positive; they are arbitrary. (The only restriction is that $x_1$, $x_2$ are in the domain of $f$, but here the domain is $\mathbb{R}$, so there is no restriction on $x_1$ and $x_2$.)

After you cut off "For all $x_1$ and $x_2$", the remaining statement is: "the fact that $f(x_1)=f(x_2)$ implies $x_1=x_2$". A proof of "If $A$, then $B$" proceeds as follows: one assumes $A$ and uses it to prove $B$. Here you assume $f(x_1)=f(x_2)$. From there, you need to prove $x_1=x_2$.

Also, please answer the question from post #2:
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Are you sure the second line is not $-x^2$ when $x<0$?
This is because the formula for $f$ says $(-x)^2$, but later you consider $-(x-1)^2$. Whether $f$ is 1-1 depends on the answer.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Sorry, this makes no sense. First, $x+1$ is not guaranteed to be positive: take $x=-2$ for example. Second, mathematics is all about precision in using definitions and in following the rules of proof. The concept of 1-1 function is not a metaphor; it's a precise statement. Namely, $f$ is 1-1 if for all $x_1$ and $x_2$, the fact that $f(x_1)=f(x_2)$ implies $x_1=x_2$. A proof of statements starting with "For all $z$" usually starts with "Consider an arbitrary $z$". In this case, you consider arbitrary $x_1$ and $x_2$. You are not allowed to assume whether they are positive; they are arbitrary. (The only restriction is that $x_1$, $x_2$ are in the domain of $f$, but here the domain is $\mathbb{R}$, so there is no restriction on $x_1$ and $x_2$.)

After you cut off "For all $x_1$ and $x_2$", the remaining statement is: "the fact that $f(x_1)=f(x_2)$ implies $x_1=x_2$". A proof of "If $A$, then $B$" proceeds as follows: one assumes $A$ and uses it to prove $B$. Here you assume $f(x_1)=f(x_2)$. From there, you need to prove $x_1=x_2$.

Also, please answer the question from post #2:
This is because the formula for $f$ says $(-x)^2$, but later you consider $-(x-1)^2$. Whether $f$ is 1-1 depends on the answer.

Do you mean could x possibly be negative? No it cannot be negative. If x is plugged in as negative, then the other negative will cancel it out. If x is plugged in as a positive, even though there is a negative in front of the x, it will be squared to be a positive.
 
It's best not to overquote.

JProgrammer said:
Do you mean could x possibly be negative?
No, the question was "Are you sure the second line is not $−x^2$ when $x<0$?". It was not whether $x$ is negative or positive; it's about the formula used in the problem. Is it $-x^2$ or $(-x)^2$ on the second line of the definition of $f$, i.e., when $x<0$? The answer to the problem depends on this. I am asking because your original question uses $(-x)^2$, but in the solution you are using -(x – 1)^2, which supposedly is the result of substituting $x-1$ into $-x^2$ (though this substitution makes no sense in this context).
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
It's best not to overquote.

No, the question was "Are you sure the second line is not $−x^2$ when $x<0$?". It was not whether $x$ is negative or positive; it's about the formula used in the problem. Is it $-x^2$ or $(-x)^2$ on the second line of the definition of $f$, i.e., when $x<0$? The answer to the problem depends on this. I am asking because your original question uses $(-x)^2$, but in the solution you are using -(x – 1)^2, which supposedly is the result of substituting $x-1$ into $-x^2$ (though this substitution makes no sense in this context).

It is (-x^2).
 
Then the first function is indeed 1-1. You can start proving it as described in post #4.
 

Similar threads

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