MHB Right inverse clarification needed

  • Thread starter Thread starter dana1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse
dana1
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
f: (R*R)->R
f(x,y)=x+y

if I'm asked to write 2 right inversed fanctions of f.
can I say that:

f1: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-1, 1)

f2: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-2, 2)

because: f(f1(x))= f(x-1,1)=x-1+1=x

well this does matches the definition of right inverse function but what bothers me
I guess is that there is no more y on f1.
but it seems more of a problem to define:
f3(x)= (x-y, y)
because then we will receive a hole range of functions. (Whew)

please can someone clarify this point out? thanks so much in advance!(Blush)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dana said:
f: (R*R)->R
f(x,y)=x+y

if I'm asked to write 2 right inversed fanctions of f.
can I say that:

f1: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-1, 1)

f2: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-2, 2)

because: f(f1(x))= f(x-1,1)=x-1+1=x

well this does matches the definition of right inverse function but what bothers me
I guess is that there is no more y on f1.
but it seems more of a problem to define:
f3(x)= (x-y, y)
because then we will receive a hole range of functions. (Whew)

please can someone clarify this point out? thanks so much in advance!(Blush)

Hi dana! Welcome to MHB!

That all seems fine to me. ;)

To make the matter less confusing, I would suggest to use a different letter, say t.
So you would have for instance:
$$f_1(t) = (t-1,t)$$
That is be cause this $t$ is in no way connected to the $x$ and $y$ that you have in $f$.

The $y$ that you have in $f_3$ is also not connected to the $y$ in $f$.
It is just an arbitrary constant.
So it would be less confusing to write:
$$f_3(t) = (t - c, c)$$
 
dana said:
f: (R*R)->R
f(x,y)=x+y

if I'm asked to write 2 right inversed fanctions of f.
can I say that:

f1: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-1, 1)

f2: R-> (R*R)
f1(x)= (x-2, 2)

because: f(f1(x))= f(x-1,1)=x-1+1=x

well this does matches the definition of right inverse function but what bothers me
I guess is that there is no more y on f1.
but it seems more of a problem to define:
f3(x)= (x-y, y)
because then we will receive a hole range of functions. (Whew)

please can someone clarify this point out? thanks so much in advance!(Blush)

You can define an inverse function $\displaystyle x = f^{- 1} (y)$ if it exists a function $\displaystyle y = f(x)$ in which for any value of x there is one and only one value of y. Similarly if You have a two variable function z= f(x,y) You can define two inverse two variable functions $\displaystyle x= f^{-1} (y,z)$ and $\displaystyle y = f^{-1}(x,z)$ if the same conditions are satisfied. In Your case is $\displaystyle z = f(x,y) = x + y$ , so that the two inverse functions are $\displaystyle x = f^{-1} (y,z) = z - y$ and $\displaystyle y = f^{-1} (x,z) = z - x$...

Kind regards$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top