The terms function and map .

Fredrik
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
10,876
Reaction score
423
The terms "function" and "map".

I have noticed that the term "map" is used more often than "function" when a map/function is defined using the "mapsto" arrow, as in "the map x\mapsto x^2 ". It has occurred to me that when a function is defined this way, it's usually not clear what the codomain is. So I'm wondering if the choice of the word "map" has something to do with this. Is it common to define "map" differently than "function"? (One way to do it would be to use the term "function" only for the first kind of function below, and "map" only for the second kind).





These are two standard definitions of "function".

Option 1:

Suppose that g\subset X\times Y and that f=(X,Y,g). f is said to be a function from X into Y if

(a) x\in X\Rightarrow \exists y\in Y\ (x,y)\in g
(b) (x,y)\in g\ \land\ (x,z)\in g \Rightarrow y=z.

Option 2:

Suppose that g\subset X\times Y and that f=(X,Y,g). g is said to be a function from X into Y if

(a) x\in X\Rightarrow \exists y\in Y\ (x,y)\in g
(b) (x,y)\in g\ \land\ (x,z)\in g \Rightarrow y=z.

Note that when the definitions are expressed this way, they only differ by one character.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org


The difference between the two definitions is whether f or g is called the function? That doesn't seem to be a very productive difference to me.

An example of a "proper" way to denote a function using the mapsto arrowf:X\to Y, x\mapsto f(x) where f(x) is your formula of course. Usually your domain and codomain are suppressed because they're obvious from context; this would be no different from just saying "let f(x)=x2" and not saying what the domain/codomain are.

The word map itself means the same thing as function. It's probably used more as you read higher levels of mathematics, and the mapsto arrow is used more at the same time because the standard "f(x)=..." formula is no longer sufficient notation, so it's coincidence more than anything else that you notice the two together
 


Office_Shredder said:
The word map itself means the same thing as function. It's probably used more as you read higher levels of mathematics, and the mapsto arrow is used more at the same time because the standard "f(x)=..." formula is no longer sufficient notation, so it's coincidence more than anything else that you notice the two together
That's my impression too. The only source I've seen actually claim that "map" and "function" can have different definitions is Wikipedia, and they didn't have a reference for that claim.
 


The terms "map" and "function" are often synonymous, but sometimes "map" could mean a morphism in some concrete category, such as a group homomorphism (a "map of groups") or a continuous function (a "map of topological spaces"). I know Hatcher explicitly defines a map to be a continuous function. The term "function" alone usually means a map of sets, ignoring any other structure.

That's how I see it, anyway. Which term is used is generally the preference of the author.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top