Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Proving an inverse function

Tags:
  1. Jan 14, 2016 #1
    if
    upload_2016-1-15_8-59-51.png then to prove an inverse of this exists the following has been done to show that it is one to one

    upload_2016-1-15_8-59-8.png

    what is the basis of equating the 2 square roots ?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 15, 2016 #2

    Simon Bridge

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Can you think of another way to show it is 1-1?
     
  4. Jan 15, 2016 #3

    Mark44

    Staff: Mentor

    What is the definition of a function being one-to-one?
     
  5. Jan 15, 2016 #4
    an output can have only one input ,but what i don't understand is the basis of the expression upload_2016-1-15_15-42-34.png
     
  6. Jan 15, 2016 #5
    yes i can reach the conclusion if we draw a graph but i'm confused about how to arrive at the conclusion (one to one ) using this data
     
  7. Jan 15, 2016 #6

    jbriggs444

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    If you graph it, can you think of a specific feature of the graph that you could phrase mathematically?
     
  8. Jan 15, 2016 #7

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    That is exactly what you said above: "an output can have only one input". If x and y are the "inputs" for the "outputs", f(x) and f(y), and they are the same, f(x)= f(y), so they are the same output, the inputs must be the same: x= y. Showing that "if f(x)= f(y) then x= y" is exactly the same as showing "an output can have only one input".
     
  9. Jan 15, 2016 #8

    FactChecker

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It is the "If" part of an "if-then" statement. It is not proven, it is assumed. So there is no need for a "basis" for the statement.
    If (x/(x+1))0.5 = (y/(y+1))0.5
    then x=y.

    This is all that you need to prove to show that the function has an inverse.
     
  10. Jan 15, 2016 #9
    so why have you proved an input equals an input ? when what we should prove is that for two particular inputs the OUTPUT will be the same only if those two inputs are equal.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2016
  11. Jan 15, 2016 #10

    FactChecker

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That is how you prove it. Prove that if the result of the function is the same, then the inputs were the same. That what "or two particular inputs the OUTPUT will be the same only if those two inputs are equal." means. So your question is more about how to phrase the logic rather than about function inverses. This might be a good, simple example of using truth tables to see that the logic is correct.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Proving an inverse function
  1. Inverse function (Replies: 12)

  2. Inverse of a function (Replies: 6)

  3. Inverse function (Replies: 5)

  4. Inverse functions (Replies: 3)

Loading...