How to Prove The Complement Of The Domain Is Complement Of The Image If f Is Bijective












0












$begingroup$


It seems true that $f(overline{X}) = overline{f(X)}$ for $f:Arightarrow B$ and $X$ is any subset of $A$ if and only if $f$ is bijective.But I couldn't write it as a formal way like epsilon argument.It makes sense to me but the trouble I have is with the formal prove.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course not ! Take $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. Is surjective : $[0,1]to mathbb Qcap [0,1]$ but $fleft(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q}right)neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:02












  • $begingroup$
    What if it is bijective it is surely true. Let me change the question then
    $endgroup$
    – selman özlyn
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:12










  • $begingroup$
    Now it's not : $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}-xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. It's bijective $[0,1]to (mathbb Qcap [0,1])cup((mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Q)cap (0,-1])$ but $f(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q})neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$. What is exactely your exercise ?
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:33


















0












$begingroup$


It seems true that $f(overline{X}) = overline{f(X)}$ for $f:Arightarrow B$ and $X$ is any subset of $A$ if and only if $f$ is bijective.But I couldn't write it as a formal way like epsilon argument.It makes sense to me but the trouble I have is with the formal prove.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course not ! Take $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. Is surjective : $[0,1]to mathbb Qcap [0,1]$ but $fleft(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q}right)neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:02












  • $begingroup$
    What if it is bijective it is surely true. Let me change the question then
    $endgroup$
    – selman özlyn
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:12










  • $begingroup$
    Now it's not : $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}-xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. It's bijective $[0,1]to (mathbb Qcap [0,1])cup((mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Q)cap (0,-1])$ but $f(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q})neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$. What is exactely your exercise ?
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:33
















0












0








0





$begingroup$


It seems true that $f(overline{X}) = overline{f(X)}$ for $f:Arightarrow B$ and $X$ is any subset of $A$ if and only if $f$ is bijective.But I couldn't write it as a formal way like epsilon argument.It makes sense to me but the trouble I have is with the formal prove.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




It seems true that $f(overline{X}) = overline{f(X)}$ for $f:Arightarrow B$ and $X$ is any subset of $A$ if and only if $f$ is bijective.But I couldn't write it as a formal way like epsilon argument.It makes sense to me but the trouble I have is with the formal prove.







functions discrete-mathematics theorem-provers






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 9 '18 at 13:25







selman özlyn

















asked Dec 9 '18 at 12:53









selman özlynselman özlyn

12




12








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course not ! Take $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. Is surjective : $[0,1]to mathbb Qcap [0,1]$ but $fleft(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q}right)neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:02












  • $begingroup$
    What if it is bijective it is surely true. Let me change the question then
    $endgroup$
    – selman özlyn
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:12










  • $begingroup$
    Now it's not : $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}-xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. It's bijective $[0,1]to (mathbb Qcap [0,1])cup((mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Q)cap (0,-1])$ but $f(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q})neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$. What is exactely your exercise ?
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:33
















  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Of course not ! Take $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. Is surjective : $[0,1]to mathbb Qcap [0,1]$ but $fleft(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q}right)neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:02












  • $begingroup$
    What if it is bijective it is surely true. Let me change the question then
    $endgroup$
    – selman özlyn
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:12










  • $begingroup$
    Now it's not : $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}-xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. It's bijective $[0,1]to (mathbb Qcap [0,1])cup((mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Q)cap (0,-1])$ but $f(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q})neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$. What is exactely your exercise ?
    $endgroup$
    – Surb
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:33










1




1




$begingroup$
Of course not ! Take $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. Is surjective : $[0,1]to mathbb Qcap [0,1]$ but $fleft(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q}right)neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$
$endgroup$
– Surb
Dec 9 '18 at 13:02






$begingroup$
Of course not ! Take $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. Is surjective : $[0,1]to mathbb Qcap [0,1]$ but $fleft(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q}right)neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$
$endgroup$
– Surb
Dec 9 '18 at 13:02














$begingroup$
What if it is bijective it is surely true. Let me change the question then
$endgroup$
– selman özlyn
Dec 9 '18 at 13:12




$begingroup$
What if it is bijective it is surely true. Let me change the question then
$endgroup$
– selman özlyn
Dec 9 '18 at 13:12












$begingroup$
Now it's not : $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}-xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. It's bijective $[0,1]to (mathbb Qcap [0,1])cup((mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Q)cap (0,-1])$ but $f(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q})neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$. What is exactely your exercise ?
$endgroup$
– Surb
Dec 9 '18 at 13:33






$begingroup$
Now it's not : $f(x)=xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Qcap [0,1]}-xboldsymbol 1_{mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Qcap [0,1]}$. It's bijective $[0,1]to (mathbb Qcap [0,1])cup((mathbb Rsetminus mathbb Q)cap (0,-1])$ but $f(overline{[0,1]cap mathbb Q})neq overline{f([0,1]cap mathbb Q)}$. What is exactely your exercise ?
$endgroup$
– Surb
Dec 9 '18 at 13:33












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

Let us formulate matters more precisely: consider two arbitrary sets $A, B$ and a map $f: A rightarrow B$. We have the following elementary propositions:






  1. $f$ is injective if and only if
    $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X) subseteq complement_{B}f(X))$$




Proof : Assuming first the injectivity of $f$, consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$ and $y in f(complement_{A}X)$, such that $y=f(x)$ with $x in A setminus X$. If we were to assume by contradiction that $y in f(X)$ it would entail that $y=f(t)$ for a certain $t in X$; as $y=f(x)=f(t)$ and $f$ is injective, we could conclude $x=t in X$ in contradiction to $x notin X$. Hence $y in B setminus f(X)$ and the inclusion is established.



Assuming conversely that the stated inclusion holds for any subset $X$, let us consider arbitrary $x, y in A$ with $x neq y$. This means that $y in A setminus {x}$ and thus by our assumption
$$f({y})={f(y)} subseteq f(A setminus {x})subseteq B setminus f({x})=B setminus {f(x)}$$
from which we infer that $f(x) neq f(y)$ and conclude $f$ is indeed injective. $Box$






  1. $f$ is bijective if and only if:
    $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X)=complement_{B}f(X))$$




Proof : Assume first $f$ is bijective and consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$. Bijectivity comprises injectivity and thus the previous result entails that we have a valid inclusion in the direction specified above. As for the reverse inclusion we quote the following general result, valid for any function without any special hypotheses:



$$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(A) setminus f(X) subseteq f(A setminus X))$$



and we bear in mind that since $f$ is also assumed to be surjective, we automatically have $f(A)=B$.



To establish the reverse implication, assuming the given relation of equality for any subset $X$ we first infer by 1. that $f$ is injective; its surjectivity we derive by considering the particular case $X= emptyset$, which yields:
$$f(A setminus emptyset)=f(A)=B setminus f(emptyset)=B setminus emptyset =B$$
This concludes the proof. $Box$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3032357%2fhow-to-prove-the-complement-of-the-domain-is-complement-of-the-image-if-f-is-bij%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    Let us formulate matters more precisely: consider two arbitrary sets $A, B$ and a map $f: A rightarrow B$. We have the following elementary propositions:






    1. $f$ is injective if and only if
      $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X) subseteq complement_{B}f(X))$$




    Proof : Assuming first the injectivity of $f$, consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$ and $y in f(complement_{A}X)$, such that $y=f(x)$ with $x in A setminus X$. If we were to assume by contradiction that $y in f(X)$ it would entail that $y=f(t)$ for a certain $t in X$; as $y=f(x)=f(t)$ and $f$ is injective, we could conclude $x=t in X$ in contradiction to $x notin X$. Hence $y in B setminus f(X)$ and the inclusion is established.



    Assuming conversely that the stated inclusion holds for any subset $X$, let us consider arbitrary $x, y in A$ with $x neq y$. This means that $y in A setminus {x}$ and thus by our assumption
    $$f({y})={f(y)} subseteq f(A setminus {x})subseteq B setminus f({x})=B setminus {f(x)}$$
    from which we infer that $f(x) neq f(y)$ and conclude $f$ is indeed injective. $Box$






    1. $f$ is bijective if and only if:
      $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X)=complement_{B}f(X))$$




    Proof : Assume first $f$ is bijective and consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$. Bijectivity comprises injectivity and thus the previous result entails that we have a valid inclusion in the direction specified above. As for the reverse inclusion we quote the following general result, valid for any function without any special hypotheses:



    $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(A) setminus f(X) subseteq f(A setminus X))$$



    and we bear in mind that since $f$ is also assumed to be surjective, we automatically have $f(A)=B$.



    To establish the reverse implication, assuming the given relation of equality for any subset $X$ we first infer by 1. that $f$ is injective; its surjectivity we derive by considering the particular case $X= emptyset$, which yields:
    $$f(A setminus emptyset)=f(A)=B setminus f(emptyset)=B setminus emptyset =B$$
    This concludes the proof. $Box$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      Let us formulate matters more precisely: consider two arbitrary sets $A, B$ and a map $f: A rightarrow B$. We have the following elementary propositions:






      1. $f$ is injective if and only if
        $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X) subseteq complement_{B}f(X))$$




      Proof : Assuming first the injectivity of $f$, consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$ and $y in f(complement_{A}X)$, such that $y=f(x)$ with $x in A setminus X$. If we were to assume by contradiction that $y in f(X)$ it would entail that $y=f(t)$ for a certain $t in X$; as $y=f(x)=f(t)$ and $f$ is injective, we could conclude $x=t in X$ in contradiction to $x notin X$. Hence $y in B setminus f(X)$ and the inclusion is established.



      Assuming conversely that the stated inclusion holds for any subset $X$, let us consider arbitrary $x, y in A$ with $x neq y$. This means that $y in A setminus {x}$ and thus by our assumption
      $$f({y})={f(y)} subseteq f(A setminus {x})subseteq B setminus f({x})=B setminus {f(x)}$$
      from which we infer that $f(x) neq f(y)$ and conclude $f$ is indeed injective. $Box$






      1. $f$ is bijective if and only if:
        $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X)=complement_{B}f(X))$$




      Proof : Assume first $f$ is bijective and consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$. Bijectivity comprises injectivity and thus the previous result entails that we have a valid inclusion in the direction specified above. As for the reverse inclusion we quote the following general result, valid for any function without any special hypotheses:



      $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(A) setminus f(X) subseteq f(A setminus X))$$



      and we bear in mind that since $f$ is also assumed to be surjective, we automatically have $f(A)=B$.



      To establish the reverse implication, assuming the given relation of equality for any subset $X$ we first infer by 1. that $f$ is injective; its surjectivity we derive by considering the particular case $X= emptyset$, which yields:
      $$f(A setminus emptyset)=f(A)=B setminus f(emptyset)=B setminus emptyset =B$$
      This concludes the proof. $Box$






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        Let us formulate matters more precisely: consider two arbitrary sets $A, B$ and a map $f: A rightarrow B$. We have the following elementary propositions:






        1. $f$ is injective if and only if
          $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X) subseteq complement_{B}f(X))$$




        Proof : Assuming first the injectivity of $f$, consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$ and $y in f(complement_{A}X)$, such that $y=f(x)$ with $x in A setminus X$. If we were to assume by contradiction that $y in f(X)$ it would entail that $y=f(t)$ for a certain $t in X$; as $y=f(x)=f(t)$ and $f$ is injective, we could conclude $x=t in X$ in contradiction to $x notin X$. Hence $y in B setminus f(X)$ and the inclusion is established.



        Assuming conversely that the stated inclusion holds for any subset $X$, let us consider arbitrary $x, y in A$ with $x neq y$. This means that $y in A setminus {x}$ and thus by our assumption
        $$f({y})={f(y)} subseteq f(A setminus {x})subseteq B setminus f({x})=B setminus {f(x)}$$
        from which we infer that $f(x) neq f(y)$ and conclude $f$ is indeed injective. $Box$






        1. $f$ is bijective if and only if:
          $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X)=complement_{B}f(X))$$




        Proof : Assume first $f$ is bijective and consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$. Bijectivity comprises injectivity and thus the previous result entails that we have a valid inclusion in the direction specified above. As for the reverse inclusion we quote the following general result, valid for any function without any special hypotheses:



        $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(A) setminus f(X) subseteq f(A setminus X))$$



        and we bear in mind that since $f$ is also assumed to be surjective, we automatically have $f(A)=B$.



        To establish the reverse implication, assuming the given relation of equality for any subset $X$ we first infer by 1. that $f$ is injective; its surjectivity we derive by considering the particular case $X= emptyset$, which yields:
        $$f(A setminus emptyset)=f(A)=B setminus f(emptyset)=B setminus emptyset =B$$
        This concludes the proof. $Box$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Let us formulate matters more precisely: consider two arbitrary sets $A, B$ and a map $f: A rightarrow B$. We have the following elementary propositions:






        1. $f$ is injective if and only if
          $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X) subseteq complement_{B}f(X))$$




        Proof : Assuming first the injectivity of $f$, consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$ and $y in f(complement_{A}X)$, such that $y=f(x)$ with $x in A setminus X$. If we were to assume by contradiction that $y in f(X)$ it would entail that $y=f(t)$ for a certain $t in X$; as $y=f(x)=f(t)$ and $f$ is injective, we could conclude $x=t in X$ in contradiction to $x notin X$. Hence $y in B setminus f(X)$ and the inclusion is established.



        Assuming conversely that the stated inclusion holds for any subset $X$, let us consider arbitrary $x, y in A$ with $x neq y$. This means that $y in A setminus {x}$ and thus by our assumption
        $$f({y})={f(y)} subseteq f(A setminus {x})subseteq B setminus f({x})=B setminus {f(x)}$$
        from which we infer that $f(x) neq f(y)$ and conclude $f$ is indeed injective. $Box$






        1. $f$ is bijective if and only if:
          $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(complement_{A}X)=complement_{B}f(X))$$




        Proof : Assume first $f$ is bijective and consider arbitrary $X subseteq A$. Bijectivity comprises injectivity and thus the previous result entails that we have a valid inclusion in the direction specified above. As for the reverse inclusion we quote the following general result, valid for any function without any special hypotheses:



        $$(forall X)(X subseteq A implies f(A) setminus f(X) subseteq f(A setminus X))$$



        and we bear in mind that since $f$ is also assumed to be surjective, we automatically have $f(A)=B$.



        To establish the reverse implication, assuming the given relation of equality for any subset $X$ we first infer by 1. that $f$ is injective; its surjectivity we derive by considering the particular case $X= emptyset$, which yields:
        $$f(A setminus emptyset)=f(A)=B setminus f(emptyset)=B setminus emptyset =B$$
        This concludes the proof. $Box$







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 9 '18 at 13:33









        ΑΘΩΑΘΩ

        2463




        2463






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3032357%2fhow-to-prove-the-complement-of-the-domain-is-complement-of-the-image-if-f-is-bij%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Wiesbaden

            Marschland

            Dieringhausen