Prove Mapping from Set to Itself: 1-1 & Not onto iff Onto & Not 1-1

  • Thread starter Thread starter mehrts
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mapping
mehrts
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Prove that there is a mapping from a set to itself that is one-to one but not onto iff there is a mapping from the set to itself that is onto but not one-to -one.

Since this is a 'iff' proof, so I must prove the statementlike two 'if' statements.

Let g:S ---> S.

Assume that g is 1-1 but not onto.

==> g(x1) = g(x2), for x1,x2 E S

==> x1 = x2

Now what ? Since the mapping is not onto, there must be no y E S such that y = g(x) for some x E S. I'm stuck. Dunno what to do :-(
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Draw a picture. A map from a set to itself can be pictured as a bunch of arrows with the tail at x and the head at f(x) for each arrow.

Injective means that no two arrows meet, and surjective means every element is at the head of an arrow.

So if we draw two blobs for two copies of X and a picture of an ijective function that is not surjective can't you see how to reverse the arrows and add somemore into get a picture with a surjective map that is not injective? The dual statement follows immediately as well.
 
Thxs I get it. :smile:

I might post the solution up here later. :cool:
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top