Why does f(f^-1(E)) $\subset$ E?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter IniquiTrance
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between a function and its inverse, particularly focusing on the inclusion f(f-1(E)) ⊆ E for subsets E of a codomain Y. The scope includes theoretical considerations regarding surjectivity and injectivity of functions, as well as specific examples to illustrate these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how f(f-1(E)) can be a proper subset of E, suggesting that the function f might not be surjective.
  • Another participant reiterates that if f is not surjective, there exists an x in E such that f-1({x})=∅, leading to f(f-1({x}))=∅, which is a proper subset of {x}.
  • A further inquiry is made about the condition f-1(f(E)) ⊇ E, questioning if this occurs when the function is non-bijective, particularly when f(a)=f(b) for a ≠ b, with a in E and b not in E.
  • A specific example is provided where f(x)=x2 is neither surjective nor injective, demonstrating that for E=[-1, 4], f(f-1(E)) results in [0, 4], a proper subset of E.
  • Another example is presented where E=[0, 2], showing that f(E)=[0, 4] and f-1(f(E))=[-2, 2], which contains E as a proper subset.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a shared understanding that the lack of surjectivity can lead to f(f-1(E)) being a proper subset of E. However, the discussion includes multiple perspectives on the implications of non-bijective functions, indicating that there is no consensus on the broader conditions under which these relationships hold.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of surjectivity and injectivity in determining the relationships between a function and its inverse, but the discussion does not resolve the implications of these properties fully. Specific examples illustrate the concepts but do not establish a definitive conclusion.

IniquiTrance
Messages
185
Reaction score
0
Hey all,

How is it that f(f^{-1}(E))\subset E for some induced metric E\subset Y, can be a proper subset of E, rather than E itself?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The function f might not be surjective. If it were not, there would be an x in E such that f-1({x})=∅. Then f(f-1({x}))=∅, which is a proper subset of {x}.
 
A. Bahat said:
The function f might not be surjective. If it were not, there would be an x in E such that f-1({x})=∅. Then f(f-1({x}))=∅, which is a proper subset of {x}.

Thank you.
 
One more question, say E\subset X s.t. f^{-1}(f(E))\supset E. How can this occur? Is this the case when a function is non-bijective, such as where f(a)=f(b) for a \neq b,a \in E, b\notin E
 
Last edited:
Let's take a specific example: f(x)= x^2 which is neither surjective ("onto" the real numbers) nor injective ("one to one").
Let E= [-1, 4]. Then f^{-1}(E)= [-2, 2] and f(f^{-1}(E))= [0, 4] which is a proper subset of E.

Let E= [0, 2]. Then f(E)= [0, 4] and f^{-1}(f(E))= [-2, 2] which contains E as a proper subsert.
 
Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K