MHB Surjectivity of x²+3 for Real Numbers: Testing for Surjectivity

AI Thread Summary
The function f(x) = x² + 3 is not surjective for real numbers because it cannot produce outputs less than 3, which is its minimum value. To test for surjectivity, one typically takes an arbitrary value y in the codomain and attempts to solve for x in the equation f(x) = y. If there are values in the codomain that cannot be reached, the function is not surjective. Proper notation is crucial when discussing functions and their mappings. Therefore, the conclusion is that f(x) = x² + 3 does not cover all real numbers.
markosheehan
Messages
133
Reaction score
0
is the function x²+3 surjective for real numbers. how do you test for surjectivity in general?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
markosheehan said:
is the function x²+3 surjective for real numbers. how do you test for surjectivity in general?

Hi markosheehan,

Welcome to MHB! :)

Let's say a function $f$ maps some $X \in \mathbb{R}$ to $Y \in \mathbb{R}$. You might write that like $f: X \rightarrow Y|X,Y \in \mathbb{R}$ or maybe just $f:R \rightarrow R$. $f$ is surjective if every element in $Y$ is mapped to by at least one input in $X$. If $Y$ is the output of the function, we need to hit every value in $Y$ in order for $f$ to be surjective.

In this example we have $f(x)=x^2+3$. If $Y$ is all real numbers, can we output to all real numbers? Are there any numbers that we cannot map to?

In general the process of proving a function is subjective when going from $R \rightarrow R$ is to take some random $y \in Y$ and solve for it in terms of $x$. Is that possible here? What happens when you try to solve for $y$?
 
Jameson said:
Let's say a function $f$ maps some $X \in \mathbb{R}$ to $Y \in \mathbb{R}$. You might write that like $f: X \rightarrow Y|X,Y \in \mathbb{R}$ or maybe just $f:R \rightarrow R$.
This should say $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}$ instead of $X\in\mathbb{R}$. Also, $R$ in $f:R \rightarrow R$ should probably be $\mathbb{R}$, just like in the first occurrence.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
This should say $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}$ instead of $X\in\mathbb{R}$. Also, $R$ in $f:R \rightarrow R$ should probably be $\mathbb{R}$, just like in the first occurrence.

Good points, thank you! Proper notation is important.

Since the OP hasn't responded I will go ahead and answer the original question. $f(x)=x^2+3$ is not surjective for real numbers as it has a global minimum at $y=3$. Any number less than 3 is not mapped to by this function.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top