Proving Discontinuity of a Bijection: f-1:Y -> X

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion centers around proving that if a function f:X -> Y is a discontinuous bijection, then its inverse f-1:Y -> X is also discontinuous. Participants are exploring the implications of continuity and bijection in the context of mathematical proofs.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the contrapositive of the original statement and the implications of continuity for bijections. There are attempts to use the epsilon-delta method to establish continuity, with some questioning the validity of these approaches. Others express uncertainty about the reasoning and seek clarification on specific steps in the proof.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing feedback on each other's reasoning and pointing out potential flaws in the proofs presented. Some participants have expressed confusion about the application of the epsilon-delta method and the conditions required for the statements to hold true.

Contextual Notes

There are mentions of specific counterexamples and conditions under which the original statement may not hold, indicating that the problem may require additional constraints on the sets involved. Participants are also reflecting on the implications of their reasoning and the need for clarity in their proofs.

jgens
Gold Member
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
50

Homework Statement



Prove that if f:X -> Y is a discontinuous bijection then f-1:Y -> X is also discontinuous.

Homework Equations



N/A

The Attempt at a Solution



The contrapositive of this statement is that if f-1:Y -> X is continuous then f:X -> Y is continuous. Since f is bijective its invertable; hence, all I need to prove is, if f:X -> Y is continuous then f-1:Y -> X is continuous.

If f is continuous there exits a value delta for every epsilon such that delta = g*epsilon, where g is a function of epsilon.

We use the epislon delta method to prove f-1 is continuous. Hence, for all epsilon greater than zero there exists a delta greater than zero such that 0 < abs(y - k) < delta and 0 < abs(f-1(y) - f-1(k)) < epsilon. Hence, we may rewrite this as 0 < abs(f(x) - f(c)) < delta and 0 < abs(x - c) < epsilon. Since, this is merely the situation for f with epsilon and delta switched it follows that delta = epsilon/g. Therefore f-1:Y -> X is continuous. Q.E.D.

I think some of my reasoning isn't particularly great, so any suggestions on how to correct this proof are welcome. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jgens said:
The contrapositive of this statement is that if f-1:Y -> X is continuous then f:X -> Y is continuous. Since f is bijective its invertable; hence, all I need to prove is, if f:X -> Y is continuous then f-1:Y -> X is continuous.
You can't prove an implication by proving its converse. While that statement is also true, it does not show that "if f-1:Y -> X is continuous then f:X -> Y is continuous". If you're trying to prove the contrapositive statement the straightforward constructive way, you have to start by assuming that f-1 is continuous.
 
Last edited:
Sorry. I figured that since if a function is completely invertable then it's inverse is completely invertable as well, and since any function f that has a complete inverse g can also be called g-1, it followed that if f is a continuous bijection then f-1 is also continuous or equivalently stated if g-1 is a continuous bijection, then g is also continuous. I should have caught that and proved it probably. It should be simple to fix that part though.

If f-1 is continuous then for every epsilon (e) there exists a delta (d) given by d = g*e where g is a function of e.

We use the epsilon delta method to prove f is continuous. For all e > 0 there exists a d > 0 such that 0 < abs(x - c) < d and 0 < abs(f(x) - f(c)) < e. Which is equivalent to 0 < abs(f-1(y) - f-1(k)) < d and 0 < abs(y - k) < e. Since this is merely the situation for f-1 with e and d switched it follows that d = e/g. Q.E.D.

I'm certain there still has to be something wrong with that though.
 
jgens said:

Homework Statement



Prove that if f:X -> Y is a discontinuous bijection then f-1:Y -> X is also discontinuous.

The Attempt at a Solution



The contrapositive of this statement is that if f-1:Y -> X is continuous then f:X -> Y is continuous. Since f is bijective its invertable; hence, all I need to prove is, if f:X -> Y is continuous then f-1:Y -> X is continuous.

If f is continuous there exits a value delta for every epsilon such that delta = g*epsilon, where g is a function of epsilon.
I can't make any sense of this.[/color]

We use the epislon delta method to prove f-1 is continuous. Hence, for all epsilon greater than zero there exists a delta greater than zero such that 0 < abs(y - k) < delta and 0 < abs(f-1(y) - f-1(k)) < epsilon. Hence, we may rewrite this as 0 < abs(f(x) - f(c)) < delta and 0 < abs(x - c) < epsilon. Since, this is merely the situation for f with epsilon and delta switched it follows that delta = epsilon/g. Therefore f-1:Y -> X is continuous. Q.E.D. No: think about what you want to show. You want to show that, for each c in X, if I give you a B>0 then you can find an A>0 such that |x-c|<A implies that |f(x)-f(c)|<B. Your 'proof' can only handle the case when the B I give you is the delta you found, which depended on your original epsilon! [/color]

Without certain conditions on X the statement to prove is false, anyway. A common counterexample is with X = [0,1) U (1,2], f(x)=x on [0,1] and f(x)=x+1 on (1,2].
EDIT: X should be [0,2].
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't f be discontinuous then? f has to be continuous.

I'll go along with your other criticisms though. I'll try to explain my reasoning more clearly. First, what I mean by d = g*e: Suppose d = 2e +1, this can be expressed in the form d = g*e where g = 2 + 1/e, I'm simply trying to generalize something. Given 0 < abs(x - c) < e and 0 < abs(f(x) - f(c)) < d. If we go about the same process used to find e we would get e = g*d where g is a function of delta. Now I suppose my "proof" only works if you can explicitly express that in terms of d which is what I presume you were pointing out.
 
As an aside, since my proof is invalid, would anyone mind trying to point me in the right direction?
 
Nevermind, no need. I found a proof of it that I understand in my calculus book. Thanks for the repsonses!
 
jgens said:
Wouldn't f be discontinuous then? f has to be continuous.
We can only go by what you wrote:
jgens said:

Homework Statement



Prove that if f:X -> Y is a discontinuous bijection then f-1:Y -> X is also discontinuous.
Correcting the example I gave (I originally had it switched around, sorry): make that X=[0,2], then f is a discontinuous bijection with a continuous inverse.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K