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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving whether specific functions are one-to-one (1-1). Participants analyze two functions: one defined from real numbers to real numbers and another from integers to integers. The focus includes exploring definitions, providing proofs or counterexamples, and clarifying misunderstandings regarding the functions' formulations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant claims that the first function, defined piecewise, is 1-1 but expresses uncertainty about their proof.
  • Another participant questions the formulation of the function for negative inputs, suggesting a possible misunderstanding of the notation used.
  • Concerns are raised about the relevance of certain algebraic manipulations presented by the first participant, with calls for a more rigorous approach to proving 1-1 functions.
  • Participants emphasize the importance of precision in definitions and proofs, particularly in the context of arbitrary inputs.
  • There is a discussion about whether the function for negative inputs is correctly represented as $(-x)^2$ versus $-x^2$, which affects the proof of its one-to-one nature.
  • A later reply suggests that if the function is indeed $(-x)^2$, then it can be proven to be 1-1 as described in previous posts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correctness of the initial proofs provided. There is disagreement regarding the formulation of the function for negative inputs, which is critical to determining whether the function is 1-1. The discussion remains unresolved on the validity of the proofs and the interpretations of the function definitions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for clarity in mathematical definitions and the implications of assumptions made during proofs. The discussion reflects varying levels of understanding regarding the properties of the functions in question.

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 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K