Show that the inverse of function $f$ is one to one

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











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I have Mathematics IV class. I need to prove that inverses of all functions is an one to one function. I cannot do anything. Is there anybody can help me?



$f(x) = y Rightarrow f^-1(x)$ is a one to one function?







share|cite|improve this question


















  • 2




    Inverses are defined iff the function in question is bijective.
    – Colescu
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:03










  • What is the definition of inverse function you are using?
    – aventurin
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:09










  • If $f:Arightarrow B$ has an inverse, then $f$ is a bijection. This means that there is a bijective function $f^-1:Brightarrow A$. A bijection is both an surjection and an injection (one-to-one).
    – Bobson Dugnutt
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:10










  • The inverse of $f^-1(x)$ is $f(x)$. Since only one-to-one functions have inverses, $f^-1(x)$ is one-to-one.
    – Timothy Cho
    Dec 29 '16 at 19:15














up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I have Mathematics IV class. I need to prove that inverses of all functions is an one to one function. I cannot do anything. Is there anybody can help me?



$f(x) = y Rightarrow f^-1(x)$ is a one to one function?







share|cite|improve this question


















  • 2




    Inverses are defined iff the function in question is bijective.
    – Colescu
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:03










  • What is the definition of inverse function you are using?
    – aventurin
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:09










  • If $f:Arightarrow B$ has an inverse, then $f$ is a bijection. This means that there is a bijective function $f^-1:Brightarrow A$. A bijection is both an surjection and an injection (one-to-one).
    – Bobson Dugnutt
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:10










  • The inverse of $f^-1(x)$ is $f(x)$. Since only one-to-one functions have inverses, $f^-1(x)$ is one-to-one.
    – Timothy Cho
    Dec 29 '16 at 19:15












up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











I have Mathematics IV class. I need to prove that inverses of all functions is an one to one function. I cannot do anything. Is there anybody can help me?



$f(x) = y Rightarrow f^-1(x)$ is a one to one function?







share|cite|improve this question














I have Mathematics IV class. I need to prove that inverses of all functions is an one to one function. I cannot do anything. Is there anybody can help me?



$f(x) = y Rightarrow f^-1(x)$ is a one to one function?









share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Oct 1 '16 at 12:05









Bobson Dugnutt

8,52831939




8,52831939










asked Oct 1 '16 at 12:00









Furkan Şahin

137




137







  • 2




    Inverses are defined iff the function in question is bijective.
    – Colescu
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:03










  • What is the definition of inverse function you are using?
    – aventurin
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:09










  • If $f:Arightarrow B$ has an inverse, then $f$ is a bijection. This means that there is a bijective function $f^-1:Brightarrow A$. A bijection is both an surjection and an injection (one-to-one).
    – Bobson Dugnutt
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:10










  • The inverse of $f^-1(x)$ is $f(x)$. Since only one-to-one functions have inverses, $f^-1(x)$ is one-to-one.
    – Timothy Cho
    Dec 29 '16 at 19:15












  • 2




    Inverses are defined iff the function in question is bijective.
    – Colescu
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:03










  • What is the definition of inverse function you are using?
    – aventurin
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:09










  • If $f:Arightarrow B$ has an inverse, then $f$ is a bijection. This means that there is a bijective function $f^-1:Brightarrow A$. A bijection is both an surjection and an injection (one-to-one).
    – Bobson Dugnutt
    Oct 1 '16 at 12:10










  • The inverse of $f^-1(x)$ is $f(x)$. Since only one-to-one functions have inverses, $f^-1(x)$ is one-to-one.
    – Timothy Cho
    Dec 29 '16 at 19:15







2




2




Inverses are defined iff the function in question is bijective.
– Colescu
Oct 1 '16 at 12:03




Inverses are defined iff the function in question is bijective.
– Colescu
Oct 1 '16 at 12:03












What is the definition of inverse function you are using?
– aventurin
Oct 1 '16 at 12:09




What is the definition of inverse function you are using?
– aventurin
Oct 1 '16 at 12:09












If $f:Arightarrow B$ has an inverse, then $f$ is a bijection. This means that there is a bijective function $f^-1:Brightarrow A$. A bijection is both an surjection and an injection (one-to-one).
– Bobson Dugnutt
Oct 1 '16 at 12:10




If $f:Arightarrow B$ has an inverse, then $f$ is a bijection. This means that there is a bijective function $f^-1:Brightarrow A$. A bijection is both an surjection and an injection (one-to-one).
– Bobson Dugnutt
Oct 1 '16 at 12:10












The inverse of $f^-1(x)$ is $f(x)$. Since only one-to-one functions have inverses, $f^-1(x)$ is one-to-one.
– Timothy Cho
Dec 29 '16 at 19:15




The inverse of $f^-1(x)$ is $f(x)$. Since only one-to-one functions have inverses, $f^-1(x)$ is one-to-one.
– Timothy Cho
Dec 29 '16 at 19:15










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote













Let $f:A to B$ be a function. Suppose that the inverse function $g:B to A$ is noninjective. Sso there exist $b_1 neq b_2 in B$ so that $g(b_1)=g(b_2)$. Then $f$ is not well defined since $f circ g(b_1) neq f circ g(b_2)$, meaning that one element gets mapped to two different places.



This is a failure of the "vertical line test" in elementary calculus if that helps.






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    Suppose that $f:Xrightarrow Y$ is a bijective function. Then for every $yin Y$ there exists a unique element $x_yin X$ such that $f(x_y)=y$. One can then define a new function $f^-1:Yrightarrow X:ymapsto x_y$. Clearly one has that $fcirc f^-1=Id_Y$ and $f^-1circ f=Id_X$. The goal is to show that $f^-1$ is bijective as well.



    Suppose that $f^-1(y)=f^-1(y')$, by applying $f$ to this equalty we get that $y=y'$, hence $f^-1$ is injective. Now choose $xin X$, then $f^-1(f(x))=x$, hence $f^-1$ is surjective.






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Let $f : E to F$ be a function. If $f^-1$ exists, then by definition :



      $forall x in E, f^-1(f(x)) = x $ and $forall y in F,f(f^-1(y)) = x $



      From there you can easily show that both $f$ and $f^-1$ are both "one to one or more" AND "one to one or less" which is "one to one".






      share|cite|improve this answer




















      • What in the world does "one to one or more/less" mean?
        – Ennar
        Oct 1 '16 at 13:13










      • Haha "one to one or more" for surjective and "one to one or less" for injective. It was my attempt to be understood by the author since he used "one to one" which I assume means bijective.
        – Furrane
        Oct 1 '16 at 14:47

















      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Let me give you a little more general statement:




      Lemma. Let $fcolon Ato B$ and $gcolon Bto C$ functions. Then



      $a)$ if $gcirc f$ is injective, so is $f$,



      $b)$ if $gcirc f$ is surjective, so is $g$.




      Now, assuming $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, we have that there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f = operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$, but then by $a)$ $g$ is injective since $operatornameid_B$ is, which answers your question.



      Proof of Lemma. I will prove $a)$ and encourage you to prove $b)$ as an exercise. Let $x,yin A$ such that $f(x) = f(y)$. Then $(gcirc f)(x) = (gcirc f)(y)$ which implies $x = y$ since $gcirc f$ is injective. This proves that $f$ is injective as well.



      But, since we are here, let's mention a very useful proposition as well:




      Proposition. Function $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible if and only if it is bijective.




      Before the proof, let's see how this answers your question. Assume that $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, i.e. there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. But then $g$ is invertible as well and hence by our proposition bijective.



      Proof of the Proposition. Assume that $f$ is bijective. That means that for any $bin B$ there is unique $ain A$ such that $f(a) = b$. Define $gcolon Bto A$ with $g(b) = a$. Then for any $ain A$, $g(f(a)) = a$ by definition of $g$ and we have $f(g(b)) = f(a) = b$, for all $bin B$, i.e. $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$ and $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. Hence, $f$ is invertible with $g$ its inverse.



      For the other direction, use the Lemma.






      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%2f1949149%2fshow-that-the-inverse-of-function-f-is-one-to-one%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest






























        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes








        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        1
        down vote













        Let $f:A to B$ be a function. Suppose that the inverse function $g:B to A$ is noninjective. Sso there exist $b_1 neq b_2 in B$ so that $g(b_1)=g(b_2)$. Then $f$ is not well defined since $f circ g(b_1) neq f circ g(b_2)$, meaning that one element gets mapped to two different places.



        This is a failure of the "vertical line test" in elementary calculus if that helps.






        share|cite|improve this answer
























          up vote
          1
          down vote













          Let $f:A to B$ be a function. Suppose that the inverse function $g:B to A$ is noninjective. Sso there exist $b_1 neq b_2 in B$ so that $g(b_1)=g(b_2)$. Then $f$ is not well defined since $f circ g(b_1) neq f circ g(b_2)$, meaning that one element gets mapped to two different places.



          This is a failure of the "vertical line test" in elementary calculus if that helps.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















            up vote
            1
            down vote










            up vote
            1
            down vote









            Let $f:A to B$ be a function. Suppose that the inverse function $g:B to A$ is noninjective. Sso there exist $b_1 neq b_2 in B$ so that $g(b_1)=g(b_2)$. Then $f$ is not well defined since $f circ g(b_1) neq f circ g(b_2)$, meaning that one element gets mapped to two different places.



            This is a failure of the "vertical line test" in elementary calculus if that helps.






            share|cite|improve this answer












            Let $f:A to B$ be a function. Suppose that the inverse function $g:B to A$ is noninjective. Sso there exist $b_1 neq b_2 in B$ so that $g(b_1)=g(b_2)$. Then $f$ is not well defined since $f circ g(b_1) neq f circ g(b_2)$, meaning that one element gets mapped to two different places.



            This is a failure of the "vertical line test" in elementary calculus if that helps.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Oct 1 '16 at 12:16









            Andres Mejia

            15.2k11444




            15.2k11444




















                up vote
                0
                down vote













                Suppose that $f:Xrightarrow Y$ is a bijective function. Then for every $yin Y$ there exists a unique element $x_yin X$ such that $f(x_y)=y$. One can then define a new function $f^-1:Yrightarrow X:ymapsto x_y$. Clearly one has that $fcirc f^-1=Id_Y$ and $f^-1circ f=Id_X$. The goal is to show that $f^-1$ is bijective as well.



                Suppose that $f^-1(y)=f^-1(y')$, by applying $f$ to this equalty we get that $y=y'$, hence $f^-1$ is injective. Now choose $xin X$, then $f^-1(f(x))=x$, hence $f^-1$ is surjective.






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  Suppose that $f:Xrightarrow Y$ is a bijective function. Then for every $yin Y$ there exists a unique element $x_yin X$ such that $f(x_y)=y$. One can then define a new function $f^-1:Yrightarrow X:ymapsto x_y$. Clearly one has that $fcirc f^-1=Id_Y$ and $f^-1circ f=Id_X$. The goal is to show that $f^-1$ is bijective as well.



                  Suppose that $f^-1(y)=f^-1(y')$, by applying $f$ to this equalty we get that $y=y'$, hence $f^-1$ is injective. Now choose $xin X$, then $f^-1(f(x))=x$, hence $f^-1$ is surjective.






                  share|cite|improve this answer






















                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote









                    Suppose that $f:Xrightarrow Y$ is a bijective function. Then for every $yin Y$ there exists a unique element $x_yin X$ such that $f(x_y)=y$. One can then define a new function $f^-1:Yrightarrow X:ymapsto x_y$. Clearly one has that $fcirc f^-1=Id_Y$ and $f^-1circ f=Id_X$. The goal is to show that $f^-1$ is bijective as well.



                    Suppose that $f^-1(y)=f^-1(y')$, by applying $f$ to this equalty we get that $y=y'$, hence $f^-1$ is injective. Now choose $xin X$, then $f^-1(f(x))=x$, hence $f^-1$ is surjective.






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    Suppose that $f:Xrightarrow Y$ is a bijective function. Then for every $yin Y$ there exists a unique element $x_yin X$ such that $f(x_y)=y$. One can then define a new function $f^-1:Yrightarrow X:ymapsto x_y$. Clearly one has that $fcirc f^-1=Id_Y$ and $f^-1circ f=Id_X$. The goal is to show that $f^-1$ is bijective as well.



                    Suppose that $f^-1(y)=f^-1(y')$, by applying $f$ to this equalty we get that $y=y'$, hence $f^-1$ is injective. Now choose $xin X$, then $f^-1(f(x))=x$, hence $f^-1$ is surjective.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Oct 1 '16 at 12:10









                    Mathematician 42

                    8,15111437




                    8,15111437




















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Let $f : E to F$ be a function. If $f^-1$ exists, then by definition :



                        $forall x in E, f^-1(f(x)) = x $ and $forall y in F,f(f^-1(y)) = x $



                        From there you can easily show that both $f$ and $f^-1$ are both "one to one or more" AND "one to one or less" which is "one to one".






                        share|cite|improve this answer




















                        • What in the world does "one to one or more/less" mean?
                          – Ennar
                          Oct 1 '16 at 13:13










                        • Haha "one to one or more" for surjective and "one to one or less" for injective. It was my attempt to be understood by the author since he used "one to one" which I assume means bijective.
                          – Furrane
                          Oct 1 '16 at 14:47














                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Let $f : E to F$ be a function. If $f^-1$ exists, then by definition :



                        $forall x in E, f^-1(f(x)) = x $ and $forall y in F,f(f^-1(y)) = x $



                        From there you can easily show that both $f$ and $f^-1$ are both "one to one or more" AND "one to one or less" which is "one to one".






                        share|cite|improve this answer




















                        • What in the world does "one to one or more/less" mean?
                          – Ennar
                          Oct 1 '16 at 13:13










                        • Haha "one to one or more" for surjective and "one to one or less" for injective. It was my attempt to be understood by the author since he used "one to one" which I assume means bijective.
                          – Furrane
                          Oct 1 '16 at 14:47












                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote










                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote









                        Let $f : E to F$ be a function. If $f^-1$ exists, then by definition :



                        $forall x in E, f^-1(f(x)) = x $ and $forall y in F,f(f^-1(y)) = x $



                        From there you can easily show that both $f$ and $f^-1$ are both "one to one or more" AND "one to one or less" which is "one to one".






                        share|cite|improve this answer












                        Let $f : E to F$ be a function. If $f^-1$ exists, then by definition :



                        $forall x in E, f^-1(f(x)) = x $ and $forall y in F,f(f^-1(y)) = x $



                        From there you can easily show that both $f$ and $f^-1$ are both "one to one or more" AND "one to one or less" which is "one to one".







                        share|cite|improve this answer












                        share|cite|improve this answer



                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        answered Oct 1 '16 at 12:16









                        Furrane

                        1,3701416




                        1,3701416











                        • What in the world does "one to one or more/less" mean?
                          – Ennar
                          Oct 1 '16 at 13:13










                        • Haha "one to one or more" for surjective and "one to one or less" for injective. It was my attempt to be understood by the author since he used "one to one" which I assume means bijective.
                          – Furrane
                          Oct 1 '16 at 14:47
















                        • What in the world does "one to one or more/less" mean?
                          – Ennar
                          Oct 1 '16 at 13:13










                        • Haha "one to one or more" for surjective and "one to one or less" for injective. It was my attempt to be understood by the author since he used "one to one" which I assume means bijective.
                          – Furrane
                          Oct 1 '16 at 14:47















                        What in the world does "one to one or more/less" mean?
                        – Ennar
                        Oct 1 '16 at 13:13




                        What in the world does "one to one or more/less" mean?
                        – Ennar
                        Oct 1 '16 at 13:13












                        Haha "one to one or more" for surjective and "one to one or less" for injective. It was my attempt to be understood by the author since he used "one to one" which I assume means bijective.
                        – Furrane
                        Oct 1 '16 at 14:47




                        Haha "one to one or more" for surjective and "one to one or less" for injective. It was my attempt to be understood by the author since he used "one to one" which I assume means bijective.
                        – Furrane
                        Oct 1 '16 at 14:47










                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Let me give you a little more general statement:




                        Lemma. Let $fcolon Ato B$ and $gcolon Bto C$ functions. Then



                        $a)$ if $gcirc f$ is injective, so is $f$,



                        $b)$ if $gcirc f$ is surjective, so is $g$.




                        Now, assuming $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, we have that there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f = operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$, but then by $a)$ $g$ is injective since $operatornameid_B$ is, which answers your question.



                        Proof of Lemma. I will prove $a)$ and encourage you to prove $b)$ as an exercise. Let $x,yin A$ such that $f(x) = f(y)$. Then $(gcirc f)(x) = (gcirc f)(y)$ which implies $x = y$ since $gcirc f$ is injective. This proves that $f$ is injective as well.



                        But, since we are here, let's mention a very useful proposition as well:




                        Proposition. Function $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible if and only if it is bijective.




                        Before the proof, let's see how this answers your question. Assume that $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, i.e. there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. But then $g$ is invertible as well and hence by our proposition bijective.



                        Proof of the Proposition. Assume that $f$ is bijective. That means that for any $bin B$ there is unique $ain A$ such that $f(a) = b$. Define $gcolon Bto A$ with $g(b) = a$. Then for any $ain A$, $g(f(a)) = a$ by definition of $g$ and we have $f(g(b)) = f(a) = b$, for all $bin B$, i.e. $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$ and $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. Hence, $f$ is invertible with $g$ its inverse.



                        For the other direction, use the Lemma.






                        share|cite|improve this answer
























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          Let me give you a little more general statement:




                          Lemma. Let $fcolon Ato B$ and $gcolon Bto C$ functions. Then



                          $a)$ if $gcirc f$ is injective, so is $f$,



                          $b)$ if $gcirc f$ is surjective, so is $g$.




                          Now, assuming $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, we have that there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f = operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$, but then by $a)$ $g$ is injective since $operatornameid_B$ is, which answers your question.



                          Proof of Lemma. I will prove $a)$ and encourage you to prove $b)$ as an exercise. Let $x,yin A$ such that $f(x) = f(y)$. Then $(gcirc f)(x) = (gcirc f)(y)$ which implies $x = y$ since $gcirc f$ is injective. This proves that $f$ is injective as well.



                          But, since we are here, let's mention a very useful proposition as well:




                          Proposition. Function $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible if and only if it is bijective.




                          Before the proof, let's see how this answers your question. Assume that $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, i.e. there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. But then $g$ is invertible as well and hence by our proposition bijective.



                          Proof of the Proposition. Assume that $f$ is bijective. That means that for any $bin B$ there is unique $ain A$ such that $f(a) = b$. Define $gcolon Bto A$ with $g(b) = a$. Then for any $ain A$, $g(f(a)) = a$ by definition of $g$ and we have $f(g(b)) = f(a) = b$, for all $bin B$, i.e. $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$ and $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. Hence, $f$ is invertible with $g$ its inverse.



                          For the other direction, use the Lemma.






                          share|cite|improve this answer






















                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote









                            Let me give you a little more general statement:




                            Lemma. Let $fcolon Ato B$ and $gcolon Bto C$ functions. Then



                            $a)$ if $gcirc f$ is injective, so is $f$,



                            $b)$ if $gcirc f$ is surjective, so is $g$.




                            Now, assuming $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, we have that there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f = operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$, but then by $a)$ $g$ is injective since $operatornameid_B$ is, which answers your question.



                            Proof of Lemma. I will prove $a)$ and encourage you to prove $b)$ as an exercise. Let $x,yin A$ such that $f(x) = f(y)$. Then $(gcirc f)(x) = (gcirc f)(y)$ which implies $x = y$ since $gcirc f$ is injective. This proves that $f$ is injective as well.



                            But, since we are here, let's mention a very useful proposition as well:




                            Proposition. Function $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible if and only if it is bijective.




                            Before the proof, let's see how this answers your question. Assume that $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, i.e. there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. But then $g$ is invertible as well and hence by our proposition bijective.



                            Proof of the Proposition. Assume that $f$ is bijective. That means that for any $bin B$ there is unique $ain A$ such that $f(a) = b$. Define $gcolon Bto A$ with $g(b) = a$. Then for any $ain A$, $g(f(a)) = a$ by definition of $g$ and we have $f(g(b)) = f(a) = b$, for all $bin B$, i.e. $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$ and $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. Hence, $f$ is invertible with $g$ its inverse.



                            For the other direction, use the Lemma.






                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            Let me give you a little more general statement:




                            Lemma. Let $fcolon Ato B$ and $gcolon Bto C$ functions. Then



                            $a)$ if $gcirc f$ is injective, so is $f$,



                            $b)$ if $gcirc f$ is surjective, so is $g$.




                            Now, assuming $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, we have that there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f = operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$, but then by $a)$ $g$ is injective since $operatornameid_B$ is, which answers your question.



                            Proof of Lemma. I will prove $a)$ and encourage you to prove $b)$ as an exercise. Let $x,yin A$ such that $f(x) = f(y)$. Then $(gcirc f)(x) = (gcirc f)(y)$ which implies $x = y$ since $gcirc f$ is injective. This proves that $f$ is injective as well.



                            But, since we are here, let's mention a very useful proposition as well:




                            Proposition. Function $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible if and only if it is bijective.




                            Before the proof, let's see how this answers your question. Assume that $fcolon Ato B$ is invertible, i.e. there exists $gcolon Bto A$ such that $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$, $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. But then $g$ is invertible as well and hence by our proposition bijective.



                            Proof of the Proposition. Assume that $f$ is bijective. That means that for any $bin B$ there is unique $ain A$ such that $f(a) = b$. Define $gcolon Bto A$ with $g(b) = a$. Then for any $ain A$, $g(f(a)) = a$ by definition of $g$ and we have $f(g(b)) = f(a) = b$, for all $bin B$, i.e. $gcirc f=operatornameid_A$ and $fcirc g = operatornameid_B$. Hence, $f$ is invertible with $g$ its inverse.



                            For the other direction, use the Lemma.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered Oct 1 '16 at 13:06









                            Ennar

                            13.1k32343




                            13.1k32343






















                                 

                                draft saved


                                draft discarded


























                                 


                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1949149%2fshow-that-the-inverse-of-function-f-is-one-to-one%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?

                                Propositional logic and tautologies

                                Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility