Denumerable set and surjective function

In summary: Suppose there exists a function f: N -> B for some set B. Then, for all b\inB, there exists an n\inN such that f(n) = b. Define h: B-> N as the function f(b) = n' where for all b\inB, n'\inN' is the smallest element of some subset N' of N. Thus, h is injective.In short, if A is a subset of a larger set, then there exists a function g: A->B such that g(a) is in the subset and g(a) is not in the larger set. This
  • #1
autre
117
0
This is the problem:

"Prove that if A is denumerable and there exists a g: A -> B that is surjective, then there exists an h: B -> A so that h is injective."

So I've started it as:

Suppose a set A is denumerable and a function f: A-> B is surjective. Since there exists a surjective function f: A-> B and A is denumerable, B is countable..."

I'm a little stuck here. Any ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Any ideas?
 
  • #3
I'm really stuck guys :frown:
 
  • #4
Try to explicitely define h. You won't need anywhere that A and B are denumerable.

Try to define h as some kind of "inverse" of g.
 
  • #5
Try a simpler problem first, replacing the assumption "A is denumerable" with "A = N, the set of natural numbers." If you have surjection g : N --> B, you can explicitly define an injection h : B --> N in terms of g. See if you can figure that out first.
 
  • #6
Try a simpler problem first, replacing the assumption "A is denumerable" with "A = N, the set of natural numbers."

Good idea.

How about something like this:

Suppose there exists a function f: N -> B for some set B. Then, for all b in B, there exists an n in N such that f(n) = b. Define h: B-> A as the function that maps all b in B to a single n in N such that h(b) = n. Since f is surjective, there exists such a function. Since h(b') = h(b) = n iff b' =/= b, h is injective.

Am I on the right track?
 
  • #7
autre said:
Suppose there exists a function f: N -> B for some set B. Then, for all b in B, there exists an n in N such that f(n) = b. Define h: B-> A as the function that maps all b in B to a single n in N such that h(b) = n.
Great. For each b, there might be a number of different n's you could choose. How might you explicitly choose one of those n's from amongst all the possible choices, if you had to?
Since h(b') = h(b) = n iff b' =/= b, h is injective.
This isn't quite right, perhaps a typo?
Am I on the right track?
Yes.
 
  • #8
Great. For each b, there might be a number of different n's you could choose. How might you explicitly choose one of those n's from amongst all the possible choices, if you had to?

Perhaps an n such that if f(n) = f(n') = b, n=n'?

This isn't quite right, perhaps a typo?

Not a typo, just brainstorming. :redface:
 
  • #9
autre said:
Perhaps an n such that if f(n) = f(n') = b, n=n'?

How may you explicitly choose an element from a subset of the natural numbers?

You can use the axiom of choice, or a much easier method which you probably are familiar with.
 
  • #10
How may you explicitly choose an element from a subset of the natural numbers?

The well-ordering principle?
 
  • #11
Quick question, can I assume A = N without loss of generality?
 
  • #12
autre said:
The well-ordering principle?

Why wonder when you can just pick the smallest one?

You can assume A = N if you are comfortable with the proof of how it applies generally (hint: A is in bijection with N).
 
  • #13
Why wonder when you can just pick the smallest one?

I'm not sure if we have gone over the theorem that states that every subset of N has a smallest element, is it related to the well-ordering principle?

So perhaps something like this:

Suppose there exists a function f: N -> B for some set B. Then, for all b[itex]\in[/itex]B, there exists an n[itex]\in[/itex]N such that f(n) = b. Define h: B-> N as the function f(b) = n' where for all b[itex]\in[/itex]B, n'[itex]\in[/itex]N' is the smallest element of some N'[itex]\subseteq[/itex]N. Thus, h is injective.
 
  • #14
autre said:
I'm not sure if we have gone over the theorem that states that every subset of N has a smallest element, is it related to the well-ordering principle?

Well, it's obvious isn't it? If n is a number in a subset A of N, then one of 1,2,3,...,n is the smallest element of the set. Prove: Every subset of the natural numbers containing the number n has a smallest element, by induction on n.

There is something weird about defining h(b) = n', where n' is the smallest element of some subset N' of N. You must specify this subset, or else h is not well-defined (it can't be any arbitrary set). I suggest you define N' = f^(-1)(b) (= the set {n in N : f(n) = b}). Then you can show injectiveness.
 
  • #15
Well, it's obvious isn't it? If n is a number in a subset A of N, then one of 1,2,3,...,n is the smallest element of the set. Prove: Every subset of natural numbers containing n has a smallest element by induction on n.

Ah, I think I have seen that before. In light of this, does the proof I provided above work?
 

Related to Denumerable set and surjective function

1. What is a denumerable set?

A denumerable set is a set that can be put into a one-to-one correspondence with the set of natural numbers. This means that the elements of the set can be counted and listed in a specific order.

2. How is a denumerable set different from a finite set?

A finite set has a specific and limited number of elements, while a denumerable set has an infinite number of elements. Additionally, a finite set cannot be put into a one-to-one correspondence with the set of natural numbers, whereas a denumerable set can.

3. What is a surjective function?

A surjective function is a function where every element in the range of the function has at least one preimage in the domain. In other words, every possible output of the function is mapped to by at least one input.

4. How is a surjective function related to a denumerable set?

A surjective function can be used to prove that a set is denumerable. If a function is surjective, it means that every element in the range of the function is mapped to by at least one element in the domain. This one-to-one correspondence can be used to show that the set is denumerable.

5. Can a set be both denumerable and uncountable?

No, a set cannot be both denumerable and uncountable. A denumerable set, by definition, has a one-to-one correspondence with the set of natural numbers, which means it is countable. An uncountable set, on the other hand, has no one-to-one correspondence with the set of natural numbers and therefore cannot be put into a specific order or counted.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
880
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
13K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top