$fracxx^2-1$ bijection from $(-1,1)$ to $mathbbR$

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1












I am trying to show that the function $f:(-1,1) rightarrow mathbbR$, $f(x) = fracxx^2-1$ is bijective. I have the following two questions:



1) Proving it using calculus: First I show that $f$ is injective. Since $f'(x) = -fracx^2+1(x^2-1)^2 < 0$ for all $x in (-1, 1)$, then $f$ is monotonic and hence injective.



I am having trouble showing that it is surjective using the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT). The IVT states that if $f: [a,b] rightarrow mathbbR$ is continuous and $L$ is a real number satisfying $f(a) < L < f(b)$ or $f(b) < L < f(a)$, then there exists a $c in (a,b)$ where $f(c) = L$. Clearly the function at hand is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, but to use the aforementioned theorem, we need to have a closed interval $[a,b]$ (whereas $(-1, 1)$ is not a closed interval...). I "sort of" have an idea: Since $f$ is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, $f(-1)$ isn't defined but it is basically $+infty$ and $f(1)$ is "like" $-infty$, so if $L$ is a real number $-infty< L < +infty$, i.e., $L in mathbbR$, then there exists a $c in (-1, 1)$ such that $f(c) = L$, hence $f$ is surjective. But I feel this is wrong because $f(-1)$ and $f(1)$ aren't defined and the IVT needs a closed interval.



2) How can I prove bijection without using calculus? E.g., to show injection, let $fracx_1x_1^2-1 = fracx_2x_2^2-1$ and I want to reach the conclusion that $x_1 = x_2$, but I am stuck. Also, how can I prove surjection?







share|cite|improve this question
























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    I am trying to show that the function $f:(-1,1) rightarrow mathbbR$, $f(x) = fracxx^2-1$ is bijective. I have the following two questions:



    1) Proving it using calculus: First I show that $f$ is injective. Since $f'(x) = -fracx^2+1(x^2-1)^2 < 0$ for all $x in (-1, 1)$, then $f$ is monotonic and hence injective.



    I am having trouble showing that it is surjective using the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT). The IVT states that if $f: [a,b] rightarrow mathbbR$ is continuous and $L$ is a real number satisfying $f(a) < L < f(b)$ or $f(b) < L < f(a)$, then there exists a $c in (a,b)$ where $f(c) = L$. Clearly the function at hand is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, but to use the aforementioned theorem, we need to have a closed interval $[a,b]$ (whereas $(-1, 1)$ is not a closed interval...). I "sort of" have an idea: Since $f$ is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, $f(-1)$ isn't defined but it is basically $+infty$ and $f(1)$ is "like" $-infty$, so if $L$ is a real number $-infty< L < +infty$, i.e., $L in mathbbR$, then there exists a $c in (-1, 1)$ such that $f(c) = L$, hence $f$ is surjective. But I feel this is wrong because $f(-1)$ and $f(1)$ aren't defined and the IVT needs a closed interval.



    2) How can I prove bijection without using calculus? E.g., to show injection, let $fracx_1x_1^2-1 = fracx_2x_2^2-1$ and I want to reach the conclusion that $x_1 = x_2$, but I am stuck. Also, how can I prove surjection?







    share|cite|improve this question






















      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      I am trying to show that the function $f:(-1,1) rightarrow mathbbR$, $f(x) = fracxx^2-1$ is bijective. I have the following two questions:



      1) Proving it using calculus: First I show that $f$ is injective. Since $f'(x) = -fracx^2+1(x^2-1)^2 < 0$ for all $x in (-1, 1)$, then $f$ is monotonic and hence injective.



      I am having trouble showing that it is surjective using the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT). The IVT states that if $f: [a,b] rightarrow mathbbR$ is continuous and $L$ is a real number satisfying $f(a) < L < f(b)$ or $f(b) < L < f(a)$, then there exists a $c in (a,b)$ where $f(c) = L$. Clearly the function at hand is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, but to use the aforementioned theorem, we need to have a closed interval $[a,b]$ (whereas $(-1, 1)$ is not a closed interval...). I "sort of" have an idea: Since $f$ is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, $f(-1)$ isn't defined but it is basically $+infty$ and $f(1)$ is "like" $-infty$, so if $L$ is a real number $-infty< L < +infty$, i.e., $L in mathbbR$, then there exists a $c in (-1, 1)$ such that $f(c) = L$, hence $f$ is surjective. But I feel this is wrong because $f(-1)$ and $f(1)$ aren't defined and the IVT needs a closed interval.



      2) How can I prove bijection without using calculus? E.g., to show injection, let $fracx_1x_1^2-1 = fracx_2x_2^2-1$ and I want to reach the conclusion that $x_1 = x_2$, but I am stuck. Also, how can I prove surjection?







      share|cite|improve this question












      I am trying to show that the function $f:(-1,1) rightarrow mathbbR$, $f(x) = fracxx^2-1$ is bijective. I have the following two questions:



      1) Proving it using calculus: First I show that $f$ is injective. Since $f'(x) = -fracx^2+1(x^2-1)^2 < 0$ for all $x in (-1, 1)$, then $f$ is monotonic and hence injective.



      I am having trouble showing that it is surjective using the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT). The IVT states that if $f: [a,b] rightarrow mathbbR$ is continuous and $L$ is a real number satisfying $f(a) < L < f(b)$ or $f(b) < L < f(a)$, then there exists a $c in (a,b)$ where $f(c) = L$. Clearly the function at hand is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, but to use the aforementioned theorem, we need to have a closed interval $[a,b]$ (whereas $(-1, 1)$ is not a closed interval...). I "sort of" have an idea: Since $f$ is continuous on $(-1, 1)$, $f(-1)$ isn't defined but it is basically $+infty$ and $f(1)$ is "like" $-infty$, so if $L$ is a real number $-infty< L < +infty$, i.e., $L in mathbbR$, then there exists a $c in (-1, 1)$ such that $f(c) = L$, hence $f$ is surjective. But I feel this is wrong because $f(-1)$ and $f(1)$ aren't defined and the IVT needs a closed interval.



      2) How can I prove bijection without using calculus? E.g., to show injection, let $fracx_1x_1^2-1 = fracx_2x_2^2-1$ and I want to reach the conclusion that $x_1 = x_2$, but I am stuck. Also, how can I prove surjection?









      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Jul 19 '17 at 4:04









      user56031

      30117




      30117




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          5
          down vote



          accepted










          You can show it is surjective by solving the quadratic equation. Given $y in Bbb R$ we want to find $x$ such that $frac xx^2-1=y$, or $yx^2-x-y=0, x=frac 12y(1pm sqrt1+4y^2)$ and we want the signs of $x$ and $y$ to be opposite, so we take the minus sign. The fact that you get a unique answer shows it is injective, so answers your second part as well.






          share|cite|improve this answer




















          • Thanks. I understand up to the last bit, why do we pick the minus one? I can see from drawing the graph that the plus one does not put $x$ between $(-1,1)$ as required, but how can I show this algebraically? And what do you mean by "we want the signs of x and y to be opposite, so we take the minus sign."? Could you explain a bit more in depth? Thank you!
            – user56031
            Jul 19 '17 at 5:00










          • Except for the case y=0 which has the unique solution x=0. And when y is not 0 I don't understand why you say we want the signs of x,y to be opposite, but we must take the minus sign to have |x|<1.
            – DanielWainfleet
            Jul 19 '17 at 5:10







          • 1




            If you look at the original equation, $x^2-1 lt 0$ in the region of interest, so $x$ and $y$ have opposite signs. If we choose the plus sign in the quadratic formula they will have the same sign, so that is not allowed.
            – Ross Millikan
            Jul 19 '17 at 5:11










          • @DanielWainfleet: As often, zero is a special case. We divide by $y$ in the quadratic formula, so it doesn't work cleanly. We need the numerator to be zero as well, which again says we want the negative sign.
            – Ross Millikan
            Jul 19 '17 at 5:17






          • 1




            To the O.P. : $f$ is continuous, with $ f(x)to -infty$ as $ xto 1,$ and $f(x)to +infty$ as $xto -1$ so by the IVT, $ f$ is surjective.
            – DanielWainfleet
            Jul 19 '17 at 6:11


















          up vote
          3
          down vote













          $$=>x_1x_2^2-x_1=x_2x_1^2-x_2$$
          $$=>x_1x_2(x_2-x_1)=-(x_2-x_1)$$
          $$(x_1-x_2)(1+x_1x_2)=0$$
          $$textSo, either hspace.2cmx_1=x_2 hspace.2cm or hspace.2cm x_1=-frac1x_2.$$
          The last equality is not possible due to the domain $(-1,1)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer





























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            $f(x) = fracxx^2-1 = frac12 (frac11+x - frac11-x).$

            $-1 < x < y < 1 implies frac11+x - frac11+y = fracy - x(1+x)(1+y) > 0.$
            $-1 < x < y < 1 implies -frac11-x - (-frac11-y) = frac-(1-y)+(1-x)(1-x)(1-y) = fracy-x(1-x)(1-y) > 0.$



            $therefore$
            $-1 < x < y < 1 implies fracxx^2-1 > fracyy^2-1.$



            $therefore f$ is injective.



            Let $y in mathbbR$.



            $$lim_x rightarrow -1+0 f(x) = +infty.$$
            $$lim_x rightarrow 1-0 f(x) = -infty.$$



            There is $delta_1 > 0$ such that $-1 < x < -1 + delta_1 implies f(x) < y$.



            There is $delta_2 > 0$ such that $1 - delta_2 < x < 1 implies y < f(x)$.



            Let $-1 < a < -1+delta_1$ and $1-delta_2 < b < 1$.



            Then $f(a) < y < f(b)$.



            $f$ is continuous on $[a, b]$.



            So by the intermediate-value theorem, there exists $c in (a, b)$ such that $f(c) = y$.



            $therefore f$ is surjective.






            share|cite|improve this answer




















              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',
              convertImagesToLinks: true,
              noModals: false,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: 10,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              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%2f2363442%2ffracxx2-1-bijection-from-1-1-to-mathbbr%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest






























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              5
              down vote



              accepted










              You can show it is surjective by solving the quadratic equation. Given $y in Bbb R$ we want to find $x$ such that $frac xx^2-1=y$, or $yx^2-x-y=0, x=frac 12y(1pm sqrt1+4y^2)$ and we want the signs of $x$ and $y$ to be opposite, so we take the minus sign. The fact that you get a unique answer shows it is injective, so answers your second part as well.






              share|cite|improve this answer




















              • Thanks. I understand up to the last bit, why do we pick the minus one? I can see from drawing the graph that the plus one does not put $x$ between $(-1,1)$ as required, but how can I show this algebraically? And what do you mean by "we want the signs of x and y to be opposite, so we take the minus sign."? Could you explain a bit more in depth? Thank you!
                – user56031
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:00










              • Except for the case y=0 which has the unique solution x=0. And when y is not 0 I don't understand why you say we want the signs of x,y to be opposite, but we must take the minus sign to have |x|<1.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:10







              • 1




                If you look at the original equation, $x^2-1 lt 0$ in the region of interest, so $x$ and $y$ have opposite signs. If we choose the plus sign in the quadratic formula they will have the same sign, so that is not allowed.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:11










              • @DanielWainfleet: As often, zero is a special case. We divide by $y$ in the quadratic formula, so it doesn't work cleanly. We need the numerator to be zero as well, which again says we want the negative sign.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:17






              • 1




                To the O.P. : $f$ is continuous, with $ f(x)to -infty$ as $ xto 1,$ and $f(x)to +infty$ as $xto -1$ so by the IVT, $ f$ is surjective.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 6:11















              up vote
              5
              down vote



              accepted










              You can show it is surjective by solving the quadratic equation. Given $y in Bbb R$ we want to find $x$ such that $frac xx^2-1=y$, or $yx^2-x-y=0, x=frac 12y(1pm sqrt1+4y^2)$ and we want the signs of $x$ and $y$ to be opposite, so we take the minus sign. The fact that you get a unique answer shows it is injective, so answers your second part as well.






              share|cite|improve this answer




















              • Thanks. I understand up to the last bit, why do we pick the minus one? I can see from drawing the graph that the plus one does not put $x$ between $(-1,1)$ as required, but how can I show this algebraically? And what do you mean by "we want the signs of x and y to be opposite, so we take the minus sign."? Could you explain a bit more in depth? Thank you!
                – user56031
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:00










              • Except for the case y=0 which has the unique solution x=0. And when y is not 0 I don't understand why you say we want the signs of x,y to be opposite, but we must take the minus sign to have |x|<1.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:10







              • 1




                If you look at the original equation, $x^2-1 lt 0$ in the region of interest, so $x$ and $y$ have opposite signs. If we choose the plus sign in the quadratic formula they will have the same sign, so that is not allowed.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:11










              • @DanielWainfleet: As often, zero is a special case. We divide by $y$ in the quadratic formula, so it doesn't work cleanly. We need the numerator to be zero as well, which again says we want the negative sign.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:17






              • 1




                To the O.P. : $f$ is continuous, with $ f(x)to -infty$ as $ xto 1,$ and $f(x)to +infty$ as $xto -1$ so by the IVT, $ f$ is surjective.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 6:11













              up vote
              5
              down vote



              accepted







              up vote
              5
              down vote



              accepted






              You can show it is surjective by solving the quadratic equation. Given $y in Bbb R$ we want to find $x$ such that $frac xx^2-1=y$, or $yx^2-x-y=0, x=frac 12y(1pm sqrt1+4y^2)$ and we want the signs of $x$ and $y$ to be opposite, so we take the minus sign. The fact that you get a unique answer shows it is injective, so answers your second part as well.






              share|cite|improve this answer












              You can show it is surjective by solving the quadratic equation. Given $y in Bbb R$ we want to find $x$ such that $frac xx^2-1=y$, or $yx^2-x-y=0, x=frac 12y(1pm sqrt1+4y^2)$ and we want the signs of $x$ and $y$ to be opposite, so we take the minus sign. The fact that you get a unique answer shows it is injective, so answers your second part as well.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Jul 19 '17 at 4:21









              Ross Millikan

              277k21187352




              277k21187352











              • Thanks. I understand up to the last bit, why do we pick the minus one? I can see from drawing the graph that the plus one does not put $x$ between $(-1,1)$ as required, but how can I show this algebraically? And what do you mean by "we want the signs of x and y to be opposite, so we take the minus sign."? Could you explain a bit more in depth? Thank you!
                – user56031
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:00










              • Except for the case y=0 which has the unique solution x=0. And when y is not 0 I don't understand why you say we want the signs of x,y to be opposite, but we must take the minus sign to have |x|<1.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:10







              • 1




                If you look at the original equation, $x^2-1 lt 0$ in the region of interest, so $x$ and $y$ have opposite signs. If we choose the plus sign in the quadratic formula they will have the same sign, so that is not allowed.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:11










              • @DanielWainfleet: As often, zero is a special case. We divide by $y$ in the quadratic formula, so it doesn't work cleanly. We need the numerator to be zero as well, which again says we want the negative sign.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:17






              • 1




                To the O.P. : $f$ is continuous, with $ f(x)to -infty$ as $ xto 1,$ and $f(x)to +infty$ as $xto -1$ so by the IVT, $ f$ is surjective.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 6:11

















              • Thanks. I understand up to the last bit, why do we pick the minus one? I can see from drawing the graph that the plus one does not put $x$ between $(-1,1)$ as required, but how can I show this algebraically? And what do you mean by "we want the signs of x and y to be opposite, so we take the minus sign."? Could you explain a bit more in depth? Thank you!
                – user56031
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:00










              • Except for the case y=0 which has the unique solution x=0. And when y is not 0 I don't understand why you say we want the signs of x,y to be opposite, but we must take the minus sign to have |x|<1.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:10







              • 1




                If you look at the original equation, $x^2-1 lt 0$ in the region of interest, so $x$ and $y$ have opposite signs. If we choose the plus sign in the quadratic formula they will have the same sign, so that is not allowed.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:11










              • @DanielWainfleet: As often, zero is a special case. We divide by $y$ in the quadratic formula, so it doesn't work cleanly. We need the numerator to be zero as well, which again says we want the negative sign.
                – Ross Millikan
                Jul 19 '17 at 5:17






              • 1




                To the O.P. : $f$ is continuous, with $ f(x)to -infty$ as $ xto 1,$ and $f(x)to +infty$ as $xto -1$ so by the IVT, $ f$ is surjective.
                – DanielWainfleet
                Jul 19 '17 at 6:11
















              Thanks. I understand up to the last bit, why do we pick the minus one? I can see from drawing the graph that the plus one does not put $x$ between $(-1,1)$ as required, but how can I show this algebraically? And what do you mean by "we want the signs of x and y to be opposite, so we take the minus sign."? Could you explain a bit more in depth? Thank you!
              – user56031
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:00




              Thanks. I understand up to the last bit, why do we pick the minus one? I can see from drawing the graph that the plus one does not put $x$ between $(-1,1)$ as required, but how can I show this algebraically? And what do you mean by "we want the signs of x and y to be opposite, so we take the minus sign."? Could you explain a bit more in depth? Thank you!
              – user56031
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:00












              Except for the case y=0 which has the unique solution x=0. And when y is not 0 I don't understand why you say we want the signs of x,y to be opposite, but we must take the minus sign to have |x|<1.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:10





              Except for the case y=0 which has the unique solution x=0. And when y is not 0 I don't understand why you say we want the signs of x,y to be opposite, but we must take the minus sign to have |x|<1.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:10





              1




              1




              If you look at the original equation, $x^2-1 lt 0$ in the region of interest, so $x$ and $y$ have opposite signs. If we choose the plus sign in the quadratic formula they will have the same sign, so that is not allowed.
              – Ross Millikan
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:11




              If you look at the original equation, $x^2-1 lt 0$ in the region of interest, so $x$ and $y$ have opposite signs. If we choose the plus sign in the quadratic formula they will have the same sign, so that is not allowed.
              – Ross Millikan
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:11












              @DanielWainfleet: As often, zero is a special case. We divide by $y$ in the quadratic formula, so it doesn't work cleanly. We need the numerator to be zero as well, which again says we want the negative sign.
              – Ross Millikan
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:17




              @DanielWainfleet: As often, zero is a special case. We divide by $y$ in the quadratic formula, so it doesn't work cleanly. We need the numerator to be zero as well, which again says we want the negative sign.
              – Ross Millikan
              Jul 19 '17 at 5:17




              1




              1




              To the O.P. : $f$ is continuous, with $ f(x)to -infty$ as $ xto 1,$ and $f(x)to +infty$ as $xto -1$ so by the IVT, $ f$ is surjective.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Jul 19 '17 at 6:11





              To the O.P. : $f$ is continuous, with $ f(x)to -infty$ as $ xto 1,$ and $f(x)to +infty$ as $xto -1$ so by the IVT, $ f$ is surjective.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Jul 19 '17 at 6:11











              up vote
              3
              down vote













              $$=>x_1x_2^2-x_1=x_2x_1^2-x_2$$
              $$=>x_1x_2(x_2-x_1)=-(x_2-x_1)$$
              $$(x_1-x_2)(1+x_1x_2)=0$$
              $$textSo, either hspace.2cmx_1=x_2 hspace.2cm or hspace.2cm x_1=-frac1x_2.$$
              The last equality is not possible due to the domain $(-1,1)$.






              share|cite|improve this answer


























                up vote
                3
                down vote













                $$=>x_1x_2^2-x_1=x_2x_1^2-x_2$$
                $$=>x_1x_2(x_2-x_1)=-(x_2-x_1)$$
                $$(x_1-x_2)(1+x_1x_2)=0$$
                $$textSo, either hspace.2cmx_1=x_2 hspace.2cm or hspace.2cm x_1=-frac1x_2.$$
                The last equality is not possible due to the domain $(-1,1)$.






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  3
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  3
                  down vote









                  $$=>x_1x_2^2-x_1=x_2x_1^2-x_2$$
                  $$=>x_1x_2(x_2-x_1)=-(x_2-x_1)$$
                  $$(x_1-x_2)(1+x_1x_2)=0$$
                  $$textSo, either hspace.2cmx_1=x_2 hspace.2cm or hspace.2cm x_1=-frac1x_2.$$
                  The last equality is not possible due to the domain $(-1,1)$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  $$=>x_1x_2^2-x_1=x_2x_1^2-x_2$$
                  $$=>x_1x_2(x_2-x_1)=-(x_2-x_1)$$
                  $$(x_1-x_2)(1+x_1x_2)=0$$
                  $$textSo, either hspace.2cmx_1=x_2 hspace.2cm or hspace.2cm x_1=-frac1x_2.$$
                  The last equality is not possible due to the domain $(-1,1)$.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Nov 3 '17 at 10:39

























                  answered Jul 19 '17 at 4:17









                  TRUSKI

                  5151422




                  5151422




















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      $f(x) = fracxx^2-1 = frac12 (frac11+x - frac11-x).$

                      $-1 < x < y < 1 implies frac11+x - frac11+y = fracy - x(1+x)(1+y) > 0.$
                      $-1 < x < y < 1 implies -frac11-x - (-frac11-y) = frac-(1-y)+(1-x)(1-x)(1-y) = fracy-x(1-x)(1-y) > 0.$



                      $therefore$
                      $-1 < x < y < 1 implies fracxx^2-1 > fracyy^2-1.$



                      $therefore f$ is injective.



                      Let $y in mathbbR$.



                      $$lim_x rightarrow -1+0 f(x) = +infty.$$
                      $$lim_x rightarrow 1-0 f(x) = -infty.$$



                      There is $delta_1 > 0$ such that $-1 < x < -1 + delta_1 implies f(x) < y$.



                      There is $delta_2 > 0$ such that $1 - delta_2 < x < 1 implies y < f(x)$.



                      Let $-1 < a < -1+delta_1$ and $1-delta_2 < b < 1$.



                      Then $f(a) < y < f(b)$.



                      $f$ is continuous on $[a, b]$.



                      So by the intermediate-value theorem, there exists $c in (a, b)$ such that $f(c) = y$.



                      $therefore f$ is surjective.






                      share|cite|improve this answer
























                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        $f(x) = fracxx^2-1 = frac12 (frac11+x - frac11-x).$

                        $-1 < x < y < 1 implies frac11+x - frac11+y = fracy - x(1+x)(1+y) > 0.$
                        $-1 < x < y < 1 implies -frac11-x - (-frac11-y) = frac-(1-y)+(1-x)(1-x)(1-y) = fracy-x(1-x)(1-y) > 0.$



                        $therefore$
                        $-1 < x < y < 1 implies fracxx^2-1 > fracyy^2-1.$



                        $therefore f$ is injective.



                        Let $y in mathbbR$.



                        $$lim_x rightarrow -1+0 f(x) = +infty.$$
                        $$lim_x rightarrow 1-0 f(x) = -infty.$$



                        There is $delta_1 > 0$ such that $-1 < x < -1 + delta_1 implies f(x) < y$.



                        There is $delta_2 > 0$ such that $1 - delta_2 < x < 1 implies y < f(x)$.



                        Let $-1 < a < -1+delta_1$ and $1-delta_2 < b < 1$.



                        Then $f(a) < y < f(b)$.



                        $f$ is continuous on $[a, b]$.



                        So by the intermediate-value theorem, there exists $c in (a, b)$ such that $f(c) = y$.



                        $therefore f$ is surjective.






                        share|cite|improve this answer






















                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote









                          $f(x) = fracxx^2-1 = frac12 (frac11+x - frac11-x).$

                          $-1 < x < y < 1 implies frac11+x - frac11+y = fracy - x(1+x)(1+y) > 0.$
                          $-1 < x < y < 1 implies -frac11-x - (-frac11-y) = frac-(1-y)+(1-x)(1-x)(1-y) = fracy-x(1-x)(1-y) > 0.$



                          $therefore$
                          $-1 < x < y < 1 implies fracxx^2-1 > fracyy^2-1.$



                          $therefore f$ is injective.



                          Let $y in mathbbR$.



                          $$lim_x rightarrow -1+0 f(x) = +infty.$$
                          $$lim_x rightarrow 1-0 f(x) = -infty.$$



                          There is $delta_1 > 0$ such that $-1 < x < -1 + delta_1 implies f(x) < y$.



                          There is $delta_2 > 0$ such that $1 - delta_2 < x < 1 implies y < f(x)$.



                          Let $-1 < a < -1+delta_1$ and $1-delta_2 < b < 1$.



                          Then $f(a) < y < f(b)$.



                          $f$ is continuous on $[a, b]$.



                          So by the intermediate-value theorem, there exists $c in (a, b)$ such that $f(c) = y$.



                          $therefore f$ is surjective.






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          $f(x) = fracxx^2-1 = frac12 (frac11+x - frac11-x).$

                          $-1 < x < y < 1 implies frac11+x - frac11+y = fracy - x(1+x)(1+y) > 0.$
                          $-1 < x < y < 1 implies -frac11-x - (-frac11-y) = frac-(1-y)+(1-x)(1-x)(1-y) = fracy-x(1-x)(1-y) > 0.$



                          $therefore$
                          $-1 < x < y < 1 implies fracxx^2-1 > fracyy^2-1.$



                          $therefore f$ is injective.



                          Let $y in mathbbR$.



                          $$lim_x rightarrow -1+0 f(x) = +infty.$$
                          $$lim_x rightarrow 1-0 f(x) = -infty.$$



                          There is $delta_1 > 0$ such that $-1 < x < -1 + delta_1 implies f(x) < y$.



                          There is $delta_2 > 0$ such that $1 - delta_2 < x < 1 implies y < f(x)$.



                          Let $-1 < a < -1+delta_1$ and $1-delta_2 < b < 1$.



                          Then $f(a) < y < f(b)$.



                          $f$ is continuous on $[a, b]$.



                          So by the intermediate-value theorem, there exists $c in (a, b)$ such that $f(c) = y$.



                          $therefore f$ is surjective.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Aug 13 at 9:07









                          tchappy ha

                          1327




                          1327






















                               

                              draft saved


                              draft discarded


























                               


                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2363442%2ffracxx2-1-bijection-from-1-1-to-mathbbr%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest













































































                              這個網誌中的熱門文章

                              How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                              Mutual Information Always Non-negative

                              Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?