Theorem about inverse of an inverse f

  • Thread starter Thread starter issacnewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse Theorem
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the theorem that states if \( f: A \rightarrow B \) is a bijection, then \( f = (f^{-1})^{-1} \). Participants are exploring the properties of bijective functions and their inverses.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to leverage the properties of bijections and their inverses, questioning how to demonstrate that \( x = x_1 \) in their proof. Other participants suggest examining the composition of functions to gain insights into the relationships between \( g \) and \( f^{-1} \).

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, providing hints and affirmations. The original poster has made progress by referencing a theorem about the properties of bijections, and there is a sense of collaborative exploration without explicit consensus on the final proof.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to theorems regarding bijections and their inverses, indicating that the participants are working within a framework of established mathematical principles. There is an emphasis on ensuring that the logic presented aligns with these principles.

issacnewton
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
37
Hi

I have to prove that if [itex]f:A\rightarrow B[/itex] is bijective (onto and one to one)
then

[tex]f=(f^{-1})^{-1}[/tex]

Following is my attempt. Since [itex]f:A\rightarrow B[/itex], we have [itex]f^{-1}:B\rightarrow A[/itex].

Now there is another theorem which says that function f is a bijection (onto and one to one)
iff inverse of f is also bijection. Let [itex]g:A\rightarrow B[/itex] be the inverse of
[itex]f^{-1}[/itex]. We know that g exists since [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] is a one to one.
No let [itex]x \in A[/itex] be arbitrary , then

[tex]\exists \,\, y \in B \backepsilon[/tex]

[tex]g(x)=y[/tex] but since

[tex]y \in B \Rightarrow \exists \,\, x_1 \in A \backepsilon[/tex]

[tex]f(x_1)=y \Rightarrow f(x_1)=g(x)[/tex]

So if I can show that [itex]x=x_1[/itex] and since x is arbitrary , I will complete the proof.
But I am stuck here. Can anybody suggest something ?

thanks
Newton
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let [itex]g=(f^{-1})^{-1}[/itex] and examine [itex]g\circ f^{-1}[/itex] and [itex]f^{-1}\circ g[/itex] what does this say about g?
 
Hi mat

Thanks for the hint. Here's my improvement. There is another theorem given in the section
in which I am doing this problem.

Theorem: Suppose that [itex]f:A\rightarrow B[/itex] is a bijection, then

(a)[tex](f^{-1}\circ f)(x) = x \;\;\forall x \in A[/tex]

and

(b) [tex](f \circ f^{-1})(y)=y \;\;\forall y \in B[/tex]

So I think I can use this theorem here, since [itex]f^{-1}[/itex] and [itex]g[/itex] are inverses
of each other. and both of them are bijections since f itself is a bijection. We have that

[tex]g:A\rightarrow B \;\; \mbox{and}\;\; f^{-1}:B\rightarrow A[/tex]

So using the stated theorem, we have

[tex]f^{-1}(g(x))=x \;\;\forall x \in A[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow g(x) = f(x) \;\;\forall x \in A[/tex]

In my last post , I got the equation [itex]f(x_1)=g(x)[/itex]. So from here can I claim that
[itex]x=x_1[/itex]

If I can claim that, then I can say that

[tex]f(x)=(f^{-1})^{-1}(x) \;\;\forall x \in A[/tex]

[tex]\Rightarrow f=(f^{-1})^{-1}[/tex]

is it ok ?
 
mat , can you confirm my logic in the last post ?
 
Looks good.
 
thanks for helping, mat
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K