Undergrad What is the Definition and Understanding of Surjective Functions?

Click For Summary
A surjective function, or surjection, is defined as a function f: A -> B where every element b in set B has at least one corresponding element a in set A such that f(a) = b. This means that multiple elements from set A can map to the same element in set B, which does not violate the definition of a function. An example provided is f(x) = x^2, which is not surjective when mapping from the real numbers to the real numbers, but becomes surjective when mapping from the real numbers to non-negative real numbers. The discussion clarifies that the requirement for at least one pre-image does not imply uniqueness; rather, it allows for multiple pre-images mapping to the same output. Understanding this distinction is crucial for grasping the concept of surjective functions.
Phys12
Messages
351
Reaction score
42
In my book, the definition of surjection is given as follows:

Let A and B be sets and f:A->B. The function f is said to be onto if, for each b ϵB, there is at least one a ϵ A for which f(a)=b. In other words, f is onto if R(f)=B. A function which is onto is also called a surjection or a surjective function.

However, what I don't understand is why does there need to be at least one a ϵ A? Shouldn't there be only one since it's a function and a function by definition, for a given image, cannot have 2 pre-images?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Phys12 said:
In my book, the definition of surjection is given as follows:

Let A and B be sets and f:A->B. The function f is said to be onto if, for each b ϵB, there is at least one a ϵ A for which f(a)=b. In other words, f is onto if R(f)=B. A function which is onto is also called a surjection or a surjective function.

However, what I don't understand is why does there need to be at least one a ϵ A? Shouldn't there be only one since it's a function and a function by definition, for a given image, cannot have 2 pre-images?
No. A function cannot have two ##b \in B## for the same ##a \in A##. It can, however, have two elements ##a## which map onto the same element ##b##. E.g. ##f\, : \,x \longmapsto x^2## is a function, and ##f(-1) = f(+1)##. The relation ##x \longmapsto \pm \sqrt{x}## is no function, only if we restrict ourselves to either ##+\sqrt{x}## or ##-\sqrt{x}##, but not both. ##f \, : \,\mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}## with ##f(x)=x^2## is not surjective, because the range is only ##\mathbb{R}_0^+ \subsetneq \mathbb{R}##. But ## f \, : \, \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}_0^+## with ##f(x)=x^2## is surjective.
 
  • Like
Likes Phys12
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
991