Show there exists a one to one function from N to S iff function f exists

  • Thread starter h.shin
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Function
In summary, for a set S, there exists an injective function \Phi: N \rightarrow S if and only if there exists an injective, but non-surjective function f: S \rightarrow S. This means that sets satisfying this condition are called infinite sets. To prove this statement, we can break it down into two conditional statements: (i) If \Phi: N \rightarrow S is injective, then f: S \rightarrow S is injective but not surjective, and (ii) If f: S \rightarrow S is injective but not surjective, then \Phi: N \rightarrow S is injective. To prove these statements, we can use the function n--->2n as an example
  • #1
h.shin
7
0

Homework Statement


Show that for a set S, there exists an injective function [itex]\Phi[/itex] :
N [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] S if and only if there exists an injective, but non-surjective
function f : S [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] S. (Sets S satisfying this condition are called
in nite sets.)


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


Since this is a if and only if (biconditional) statement.
I can prove this statement if i can prove the two conditional statements:
i) If [itex]\Phi: N \rightarrow S[/itex] is injective then f: S [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] S is injective but not surjective
ii)If f: S [itex]\rightarrow[/itex] S is injective but not surjective then [itex]\Phi: N \rightarrow S[/itex] is injective.

I realize that this is the step that i should take, but i just don't know how to prove these two statements..
Any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Take them one at a time. If you have phi:N->S is injective, you want to prove there is a function f:S->S that's injective but not surjective. You probably want to define f in terms of phi. Can you think of a function from N->N that's injective but not surjective?
 
  • #3
Dick said:
Take them one at a time. If you have phi:N->S is injective, you want to prove there is a function f:S->S that's injective but not surjective. You probably want to define f in terms of phi. Can you think of a function from N->N that's injective but not surjective?

yes, well
n--->2n is injective but not surjective
 
  • #4
h.shin said:
yes, well
n--->2n is injective but not surjective

Ok, so phi(n) is an element of S for all n in N. Define f(s)=phi(2n) for all of those elements of S. What's an easy way to define f(s) if s isn't in phi(N)?
 

1. How does the existence of a one-to-one function from N to S relate to the existence of function f?

The existence of a one-to-one function from N to S is a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of function f. This means that if there is a one-to-one function from N to S, then there exists a function f that maps elements of N to elements of S in a one-to-one manner. Conversely, if function f exists, then there must be a one-to-one function from N to S.

2. What is the significance of a one-to-one function?

A one-to-one function, also known as an injective function, is a function where each element of the domain maps to a unique element in the range. This means that no two elements in the domain map to the same element in the range. In the context of this statement, the existence of a one-to-one function from N to S ensures that each element in N has a unique mapping to an element in S.

3. How can you prove the existence of a one-to-one function from N to S?

To prove the existence of a one-to-one function from N to S, you can use the definition of a one-to-one function and show that for every element in N, there exists a unique element in S that it maps to. This can be done by explicitly defining the function or by providing a construction method for the function.

4. Can there be multiple one-to-one functions from N to S?

Yes, there can be multiple one-to-one functions from N to S. This is because a one-to-one function only requires that each element in the domain maps to a unique element in the range. As long as this condition is satisfied, there can be multiple ways to map the elements from N to S.

5. How does this statement relate to the concept of cardinality?

This statement is closely related to the concept of cardinality, which is the size or number of elements in a set. In this case, the statement is saying that the cardinality of the set N is equal to or less than the cardinality of the set S, since for every element in N there exists a unique mapping to an element in S. This can be seen as a way to compare the sizes of infinite sets.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
574
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
811
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
512
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
504
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
549
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
521
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
520
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
905
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top