Solving Surjective Functions Homework

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving homework problems related to surjective functions and their inverses. It establishes that any non-injective function with a right inverse is surjective and must possess at least one additional right inverse. An example provided is the function f:{a, b, c}--> {x, y}, where f(a)= x, f(b)= x, and f(c)= y, demonstrating a right inverse g:{x, y}-->{a, b, c}. The discussion emphasizes that while examples illustrate concepts, they do not serve as general proofs.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of surjective functions
  • Knowledge of right and left inverses
  • Familiarity with non-injective functions
  • Basic principles of function mapping
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of surjective functions in depth
  • Learn about the implications of right and left inverses in function theory
  • Explore examples of non-injective functions and their inverses
  • Investigate the concept of bijective functions and their characteristics
USEFUL FOR

Students studying advanced mathematics, particularly those focusing on function theory, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to surjective functions and their inverses.

SD123
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


i) Show explicitly that any non-injective function with a right inverse has another right inverse
ii) Give an example of a function which has (at least) two distinct left inverses

Homework Equations


i) I don't believe there are any.
ii) "

The Attempt at a Solution


i) Since it says "explicitly" I doubt that my attempt would count as a solution even if it were correct, but here it is;

Since the function is non-injective and has a right inverse, it must therefore be surjective as it cannot be bijective, and in order for this function to be surjective it must have at least one more right inverse.

I also tried showing first that f(x) = x^3 - x is non-injective and then showing that the values x = -1,0,1 map to f(x) = 0 that I would be showing this is true but I am not sure if it is correct.

ii) For this I am really not sure if there is an easier way to do it apart from trial and error but I understand the theory behind it.

Thanks in advance,
SD123
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try something as simple as this: f:{a, b, c}--> {x, y} defined by f(a)= x,f(b)= x, f(c)= y. g:{x, y}-->{a, b, c}, defined by g(x)= a, g(y)= c is a right inverse.

Think about that example to prove (i). However, note that an example is NOT a general proof.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K