Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: FredZarguna

Can you tell me more about bijective functions, please?

Also, the fact that Zero leads to infinity, can be seen with Obama and our national debt...

Cheers!


83 posted on 02/20/2015 10:49:11 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]


To: grey_whiskers
Sure. It means both 1-1 and onto. 1-1 means x ≠ y ⇒ f(x) ≠ f(y) -- geometrically, this means it "passes the horizontal line test: exactly one point of intersection for any horizontal line." Onto means every f(x) in the image has some x in the pre-image. [all points of f(x) are mapped from somewhere.]

So the upshot is that a 1-1+onto or bijective function has a unique inverse.

Thus this is a way of extending the ordinary notion of counting elements to infinite sets. When we count finite collections, we are putting them into 1-1 correspondence with a subset of the integers. To extend that notion to infinite sets, two sets have the same cardinality or "size" if there is a bijection between them.

The cardinality of the even integers is the same as the cardinality of the integers. Why? Here is a bijection f(N) = 2N.

Every non-empty open subinterval of the real line, no matter how small, has the same cardinality as the whole real line. Why? Here is a bijection: f(x) = arctan(αx); with "α" some suitable scaling factor that maps the arbitrary interval into (-π/2, π/2).

To prove the reals do not have the same cardinality as the integers, produce an enumeration of the reals, then show there is always a real number it doesn't contain. That's Cantor's Diagonalization Theorem.

Here's another way, more abstract but actually less difficult. Define the powerset of a set to be the set of all subsets of a set. So the powerset of {1, 2} is the set {{1}, {2}, {1, 2}, {}} [It's called the powerset because if a finite set has "S" elements, the set of all its subsets has 2S elements.]

Show that there is no bijection between any set and its powerset. Cantor did this already. It's the so-called "who shaves the barber" proof. Then show that there is a bijection between the reals and the powerset of the integers. Since there's a bijection between the reals and the powerset of the integers, there can't be one between the reals and the integers themselves.

In this extended sense [that there is no bijection] there are "more" reals than there are integers.

86 posted on 02/20/2015 11:16:41 PM PST by FredZarguna (Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson