Showing if f and g are bijective then so is g o f

  • Thread starter Thread starter bonfire09
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
If functions f and g are bijective, then the composition g o f is also bijective. The proof involves demonstrating that g o f is one-to-one by assuming g(f(a1)) = g(f(a2)) leads to a1 = a2, leveraging the properties of bijective functions. To show that g o f is onto, it is established that for every c in C, there exists an a in A such that g(f(a)) = c, confirming that the composition covers the entire codomain. A discussion on the proof process highlights common mistakes, particularly in the assumptions made about the uniqueness of elements in the mappings. Overall, the proof confirms that the composition of two bijective functions retains the bijective property.
bonfire09
Messages
247
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If ##f## and ##g## are bijective functions and ##f:A→B## and ##g:B→C## then ##g \circ f## is bijective.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


Showing ##g \circ f## is one to one
Suppose that ##g\circ f(a_1)=g\circ f(a_2)=> g(f(a_1))=g((f(a_2))## Since ##g## is one to one then ##f(a_1)=f(a_2)=b##. But since f is bijective there exists ##a_1## and ##a_2## in ##A## such that ##f(a_1)=b## and ##f(a_2)=b##. Since f is one to one then ##a_1=a_2##
Showing ##g \circ f## is onto
Since ##f## is onto there exists a ##a\in A## such that ##f(a)=b## where ##b\in B##. Then ##g(b)=c## for a ##c\in C## since g is onto. Thus ##g(b)=g(f(a))=c## implies that ##g \circ f## is onto.

Would this be right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
bonfire09 said:
Showing ##g \circ f## is one to one
Suppose that ##g(b_1)=g(b_2)##
Not a good start. You need to start with supposing ##g \circ f (a_1) = g \circ f (a_2)##
 
I fixed it now. Is the onto part correct?
 
bonfire09 said:
I fixed it now. Is the onto part correct?

Not really. You should start with some arbitrary c in C then prove there exists an a in A such that etc.
 
Oh I was thinking that the range of f is in the domain of g so I thought I could do that. I'm curious why is the way I did it was wrong?
 
bonfire09 said:
Oh I was thinking that the range of f is in the domain of g so I thought I could do that. I'm curious why is the way I did it was wrong?
You started with a b in B and found from that an a in A and a c in C. But the second of those did not require g to be onto. g is defined on B, so there would have to be a c in C. So you did not show that for any c in C there is an a in A.
 
I fixed the onto part.Here it is. Since ##g## is onto then for every ##c\in C## there exists a unique ##b\in B## such that ##g(b)=c##. Since ##f## is onto there exists a ##a\in A## such that ##f(a)=b##. Now we see ##c=g(b)=g(f(a))=g\circ f(a)##. Thus ##g \circ f## is onto
 
bonfire09 said:
I fixed the onto part.Here it is. Since ##g## is onto then for every ##c\in C## there exists a unique ##b\in B## such that ##g(b)=c##. Since ##f## is onto there exists a ##a\in A## such that ##f(a)=b##. Now we see ##c=g(b)=g(f(a))=g\circ f(a)##. Thus ##g \circ f## is onto
Good. (But it is not necessary that b is unique for this part of the proof.)
 
Back
Top