Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 18 of 18

Math Help - domain and codomain of an inverse map

  1. #16
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    399
    Awards
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Plato View Post
    What Jhevon gave you is the standard and usual definition.
    However, some set theory texts have introduced two new types of functions.
    Given a function f:A \mapsto B there are two new functions \overleftarrow f :P(B) \mapsto P(A) and \overrightarrow f :P(A) \mapsto P(B)
    Could this be what you have in mind?
    The definitions are rather difficult to type even in TeX.
    If this is it, then I will post a pdf file containing the definitions and examples.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jhevon View Post
    do these functions have a name? are they called "power functions" or something like that?
    Quote Originally Posted by Plato View Post
    I do not know. I first saw these is a text by Charles C Pinter.
    Quote Originally Posted by Obstacle1 View Post
    Here's what i originally read:

    Given a map \theta:A->B, we can associate with any element b \epsilonB the set of those elements of A that take the value b under \theta. This set is the pre-image of b under \theta and is written \theta^{-1}

    This set is given by \theta^{-1} = {a \epsilonA: \theta(a)=b}.

    The notation suggests that the inverse is a map with domain B but unless we are very lucky the codomain is not A. The above equation shows that the values of the inverse map are actually subsets of A so that the codomain is the powerset P(A).


    More generally, we can make the following definition:

    For all subsets Y of B, \theta^{-1}(Y) = {a \epsilonA: \theta(a) \epsilonY}

    of the pre-image of any subset Y contained in B. This delivers a map

    \theta^{-1}: P(B)->P(A)
    In the (old) texts that I have,

    f(A) = \{f(x) \in Y | x \in A \subset X \}

    is called the image of the set A and

    f^{-1} (B) = \{ x \in X | f(x) \in B \subset Y \}

    is called the pre-image of B and all the facts in Plato's PDF document are proven with these definitions. Pinter turns these into functions on the power sets. I wonder why? What use is made of image and pre-image as functions? Do we get anything extra out of this idea? (I guess this could be just a teaching device to drive home the fact that the inputs and outputs to the image and pre-image are sets. Or maybe it's a better notation.)
    Last edited by JakeD; June 4th 2007 at 01:06 PM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #17
    Global Moderator

    Joined
    Nov 2005
    From
    New York City
    Posts
    10,616
    Thanks
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by JakeD View Post
    In the (old) texts that I have,

    f(A) = \{f(x) \in Y | x \in A \subset X \}

    is called the image of the set A and

    f^{-1} (B) = \{ x \in X | f(x) \in B \subset Y \}
    Why do you get the impression that it is old.

    My book on Abstract Algebra uses this notation as well, except it uses f[A] instead of f(A).
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #18
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    399
    Awards
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by JakeD View Post
    In the (old) texts that I have,

    f(A) = \{f(x) \in Y | x \in A \subset X \}

    is called the image of the set A and

    f^{-1} (B) = \{ x \in X | f(x) \in B \subset Y \}

    is called the pre-image of B and all the facts in Plato's PDF document are proven with these definitions. Pinter turns these into functions on the power sets. I wonder why? What use is made of image and pre-image as functions? Do we get anything extra out of this idea? (I guess this could be just a teaching device to drive home the fact that the inputs and outputs to the image and pre-image are sets. Or maybe it's a better notation.)
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker View Post
    Why do you get the impression that it is old.

    My book on Abstract Algebra uses this notation as well, except it uses f[A] instead of f(A).
    I was just pointing out my texts aren't current, you know, like old.

    So I went back to my old texts and found the most precise one, the reference text, does define the image and pre-image as maps between the power sets. It calls these "the induced maps." But it doesn't introduce any new notation or prove anything different than the others. So I conclude this is the most precise definition, but nothing very substantial comes out of it.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Inverse trig domain
    Posted in the Trigonometry Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 9th 2010, 06:41 AM
  2. Define functions using domain and codomain
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 11th 2010, 03:04 PM
  3. inverse and the domain...
    Posted in the Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 26th 2009, 02:18 AM
  4. Need Help!!! Dealing with Domain and Codomain
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 23rd 2009, 09:43 PM
  5. Inverse domain
    Posted in the Trigonometry Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 16th 2008, 09:04 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum