Results 1 to 6 of 6

Math Help - Proving Subset

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    11

    Proving Subset

    Prove: If  f: A \rightarrow B and  g: B \rightarrow C are functions and  D \subset A, then  (g \circ f) (D) = g(f(D)) .
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by txsoutherngirl84 View Post
    Prove: If  f: A \rightarrow B and  g: B \rightarrow C are functions and  D \subset A, then  (g \circ f) (D) = g(f(D)) .
    .....isn't that the definition?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    18,390
    Thanks
    1476
    Awards
    1
    Actually it is not the definition.
     g \circ f(D) is the image of D under the mapping g \circ f:A\to C
    Whereas, g(f(D)) is the image of f(D) under the mapping g:B\to C.

    If p\in g \circ f(D) then by definition \left( {\exists d \in D} \right)\left[ {g \circ f(d) = p} \right].
    Also \left( {\exists b \in B} \right)\left[ {f(d) = b \wedge g(b) = p} \right],which means p\in g(f(D))
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Plato View Post
    Actually it is not the definition.
     g \circ f(D) is the image of D under the mapping g \circ f:A\to C
    Whereas, g(f(D)) is the image of f(D) under the mapping g:B\to C.

    If p\in g \circ f(D) then by definition \left( {\exists d \in D} \right)\left[ {g \circ f(d) = p} \right].
    Also \left( {\exists b \in B} \right)\left[ {f(d) = b \wedge g(b) = p} \right],which means p\in g(f(D))
    Excuse me, let me rephrase that. "Isn't that almost everyone's definition? Not because it is the formal definition but it blindingly obvious?"
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    18,390
    Thanks
    1476
    Awards
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexel28 View Post
    Excuse me, let me rephrase that. "Isn't that almost everyone's definition? Not because it is the formal definition but it blindingly obvious?"
    But that is exactly the point. This problem deals with a formal definition.
    Now I know that this is a personal peeve of mine.
    I give Charles Pinter full credit for making me aware of this problem.
    It is a notational problem.
    Suppose that f:A\to B and C\subset A what sense does it make to write f(C)?
    I agree with him, it makes no sense. But I disagree with his notation.
    He uses  \overline f (C) for f(C).
    And if D\subset B then \overline{\overline f} (D) is used for f^{-1}(D).
    I suggested the more intuitive notations \mathop f\limits^ \to  (C)\,\& \,\mathop f\limits^ \leftarrow  (D) but never got any real takers.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    MHF Contributor Drexel28's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    From
    Berkeley, California
    Posts
    4,563
    Thanks
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Plato View Post
    But that is exactly the point. This problem deals with a formal definition.
    Now I know that this is a personal peeve of mine.
    I give Charles Pinter full credit for making me aware of this problem.
    It is a notational problem.
    Suppose that f:A\to B and C\subset A what sense does it make to write f(C)?
    I agree with him, it makes no sense. But I disagree with his notation.
    He uses  \overline f (C) for f(C).
    And if D\subset B then \overline{\overline f} (D) is used for f^{-1}(D).
    I suggested the more intuitive notations \mathop f\limits^ \to  (C)\,\& \,\mathop f\limits^ \leftarrow  (D) but never got any real takers.
    I actually like that notation it makes more sense. I guess the real idea is that given a function f:A\to B you have automatically induced a natural function \vec{f}:\mathcal{P}(A)\to\mathcal{P}(B):E\mapsto f(E) and then once you have that nasty notational buisness out of the way you can say \vec{f}(E) and not have people wonder why a function which maps elements of a set is now mapping full subsets of that set.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Proving open subset
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 14th 2011, 10:10 PM
  2. closed subset proving in infinite sequence
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 14th 2010, 11:11 AM
  3. Proving the compactness and connectedness of a subset
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 12th 2009, 07:04 PM
  4. Help proving a subset is a subspace
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 16th 2009, 05:31 PM
  5. Proving A is a subset of B...
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 31st 2009, 05:14 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum