Surjective Functions: Understanding Domain and Range

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of surjective functions, specifically examining the functions f: Z -> Z, g: Q -> Q, and h: R -> R. It is established that f is not surjective since its range does not cover all integers, while both g and h are surjective because every output can be achieved with an appropriate input from their respective domains. The participants clarify that while 7/3 is indeed a rational number, it can also be expressed as a real number, leading to some confusion over terminology. The importance of demonstrating surjectivity through general proofs rather than specific examples is emphasized. Overall, the conversation reinforces the definitions and properties of surjective functions across different sets.
jwxie
Messages
278
Reaction score
0
Consider the function f: Z -> Z, where f(x) 4x+1 for each x is an element in Z, here the range of F = { ... -8, -5, -2, 1, 4, 7...} is a proper subset of Z, so f is not an onto (surjective) function.

When one examines 3x + 1 = 8, we know x = 7/3, so there is no x in the domain Z with f(x) = 8

But if g: Q -> Q, where g(x) = 3x+1 for x is an element in Q; and h: R -> R, where h(x) = 3x+1 for x is an element in R, both g and h are surjective function.

What I want to ask whether my understanding true or false:

1. We consider g is a valid surjective function because with x = 7/3, g(x) = 8, we can write 8/1, and so we consider it as a rational number

and
2. We consider h is surjective because 7/3 is a real number (we can alswo rewrite 7/3 as demcial...)


Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that's correct. This is easily seen from the form of g^{-1} and h^{-1}.
 
jwxie said:
because with x = 7/3, g(x) = 8, we can write 8/1, and so we consider it as a rational number

and
2. We consider h is surjective because 7/3 is a real number (we can alswo rewrite 7/3 as demcial...)Thank you

Just curious. You're not wrong to refer to 7/3 as real number, but most people would call it a rational number and reserve the term real number for those numbers that cannot be expressed as a fraction. Is there a reason for the way you're using this terminology?
 
Hi SW. Thanks. In the given, it says "h: R -> R, where h(x) = 3x+1 for x is an element in R"

Yeah I got the same gut feeling about these Z,Q, R, lol...

and thank you gigasoft
 
1. We consider g is a valid surjective function because with x = 7/3, g(x) = 8, we can write 8/1, and so we consider it as a rational number

and
2. We consider h is surjective because 7/3 is a real number (we can alswo rewrite 7/3 as decimal...)

No, actually that is not correct; at least not completely, but you caught the essential idea.

g:\mathbb{Q} \rightarrow \mathbb{Q} is a surjective function because, for any rational b, there is a rational a, such that b = g(a) and this cannot proven by just one example, and the same goes for h and the real numbers.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
653
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
627
Back
Top