Prove bijection from (0,1] to (0,1)

  • Thread starter Thread starter issacnewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bijection
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the bijection between the sets (0,1] and (0,1) using a specific mapping strategy. The identity function is applied to all irrational numbers, while rational numbers are categorized into disjoint subsets based on their numerators. The mapping from the subset A1 to B1 is defined explicitly, demonstrating a one-to-one and onto function, thereby establishing that (0,1] is equivalent to (0,1). The participants also acknowledge the discontinuity of the function, affirming that a continuous mapping in this context is not feasible.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of bijections in set theory
  • Familiarity with rational and irrational numbers
  • Knowledge of the intermediate value theorem
  • Basic concepts of continuity in mathematical functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of bijections in set theory
  • Explore the implications of the intermediate value theorem in proofs
  • Investigate discontinuous functions and their characteristics
  • Learn about cardinality and its role in comparing infinite sets
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying set theory, and anyone interested in understanding the properties of rational and irrational numbers in the context of bijections and continuity.

issacnewton
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
37
Homework Statement
Prove that ## (0,1] \thicksim (0,1) ##
Relevant Equations
Definition of a bijection
So, I need to prove that ## (0,1] \thicksim (0,1) ##. Which means that I need to come up with some bijection from ##(0,1]## to ##(0,1)##. Now here is the outline of my function. I am going to use identity function for all irrationals. So, any irrational number in ##(0,1]## will be mapped to the same number in ##(0,1)##. Now, I am going to divide rationals of ##(0,1]## as following. All rationals will be expressed in their lowest form. Now, with this understanding, first sub set is all rationals with numerator 1, second sub set is all rationals with numerator 2 and so on. Also, these sub sets will be disjoint. ##2/4## will not be included in the sub-set where numerator is ##2##, since this is ##1/2## and is already included in the first sub set. So, I have

$$ A_1 = \left\{ 1, \frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{4}, \cdots \right\} $$
$$A_2 = \left\{ \frac{2}{3}, \frac{2}{5}, \frac{2}{7}\cdots \right\} $$
$$ A_3 = \left\{ \frac{3}{4}, \frac{3}{5}, \frac{3}{7}\cdots \right\} $$

I also define the following subsets of ##(0,1)##

$$ B_1 = \left\{ \frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{4},\cdots \right\} $$
$$B_2 = \left\{ \frac{2}{3}, \frac{2}{5}, \frac{2}{7}\cdots \right\} $$
$$ B_3 = \left\{ \frac{3}{4}, \frac{3}{5}, \frac{3}{7}\cdots \right\} $$

Now, I am going to map ##A_i## to ##B_i## for all ##i \geqslant 2##. So, this is going to be an identity function. And for ##A_1## and ##B_1##, the mapping will be as follows

$$ 1 \longrightarrow \frac{1}{2} $$
$$ \frac{1}{2} \longrightarrow \frac{1}{3} $$
$$ \frac{1}{3} \longrightarrow \frac{1}{4} $$
$$\cdots$$

So, with this kind of mapping, the mapping is a one-to-one and onto function from ##(0,1]## to ##(0,1)##. And that proves that ## (0,1] \thicksim (0,1) ##. Do you think this is a valid proof ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't see anything wrong with this. It's also possible to show that [0, 1] is isomorphic to [0, 1] X [0, 1], but the mapping, like yours, is of course not continuous.
 
Thanks Mark, of course this is not continuous. I think its not possible for the function to be continuous in this case. What do you think ?
 
IssacNewton said:
Thanks Mark, of course this is not continuous. I think its not possible for the function to be continuous in this case. What do you think ?

Wouldn't your proof be simpler if you just considered the set ##A_1##? I.e. just the sequence ##1, \frac 1 2 \frac 1 3 \dots##? Why involve all the other rationals?

In terms of discontinuity, you can construct a proof by considering the ##a \in (0, 1)## that maps to ##1##; then use the intermediate value theorem to show that a continuous mapping from ##(0,1)## to ##(0,1]## cannot be one-to-one.
 
PeroK, yes, essentially, the proof boils down to the set ##A_1##. But I could not think this initially. I had to divide rationals and irrationals first and then try to think of how the rational mapping is to be done.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
993
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K