$fracxx^2-1$ bijection from $(-1,1)$ to $mathbbR$
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
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?
real-analysis
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
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?
real-analysis
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
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?
real-analysis
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?
real-analysis
asked Jul 19 '17 at 4:04
user56031
30117
30117
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
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.
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!
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â DanielWainfleet
Jul 19 '17 at 6:11
 |Â
show 5 more comments
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 $(-1,1)$.
add a comment |Â
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.
add a comment |Â
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.
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!
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â DanielWainfleet
Jul 19 '17 at 6:11
 |Â
show 5 more comments
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.
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!
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â DanielWainfleet
Jul 19 '17 at 6:11
 |Â
show 5 more comments
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.
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.
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!
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â DanielWainfleet
Jul 19 '17 at 6:11
 |Â
show 5 more comments
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!
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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!
â 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!
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â 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.
â DanielWainfleet
Jul 19 '17 at 6:11
 |Â
show 5 more comments
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 $(-1,1)$.
add a comment |Â
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 $(-1,1)$.
add a comment |Â
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 $(-1,1)$.
$$=>x_1x_2^2-x_1=x_2x_1^2-x_2$$
$$=>x_1x_2(x_2-x_1)=-(x_2-x_1)$$
$$(x_1-x_2)(1+x_1x_2)=0$$
$$textSo, either hspace.2cmx_1=x_2 hspace.2cm or hspace.2cm x_1=-frac1x_2.$$
The last equality is not possible due to the domain $(-1,1)$.
edited Nov 3 '17 at 10:39
answered Jul 19 '17 at 4:17
TRUSKI
5151422
5151422
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
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.
add a comment |Â
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.
add a comment |Â
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.
$f(x) = fracxx^2-1 = frac12 (frac11+x - frac11-x).$
$-1 < x < y < 1 implies frac11+x - frac11+y = fracy - x(1+x)(1+y) > 0.$
$-1 < x < y < 1 implies -frac11-x - (-frac11-y) = frac-(1-y)+(1-x)(1-x)(1-y) = fracy-x(1-x)(1-y) > 0.$
$therefore$
$-1 < x < y < 1 implies fracxx^2-1 > fracyy^2-1.$
$therefore f$ 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.
answered Aug 13 at 9:07
tchappy ha
1327
1327
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password