Let’s try induction
Prove that 7n-1 is divisible by 2 for every positive integer n.
Day 9: Functions and Induction
MTH 300 Fall 2020
Exams are still being graded. �I will probably return them on Thursday this week. Thank you for your patience.
Questions? Concerns?
For a review of one-to-one and onto, let’s visit the class wikitext!
Task 17: One-to-One, Onto, Both, Neither
How to prove that a given function is one-to-one
Why do we get to assume that
We are proving IF f(x1)=f(x2) THEN x1=x2
Assume f(x1) = f(x2)
This means 1/x1 = 1/x2
So x2 = x1
Thus, we have shown that f is one-to-one
f(x) = 1/x
How to prove that a given function is NOT one-to-one
Why is this enough to confirm that a function is NOT one-to-one?
We only need to show that there is a pair of x-values that have the same y-value.
Let x1 =2 and x2 = -2 Then f(2) = 4 and f(-2) = 4 but
2 does not equal -2
f(x) = x2
How to prove that a given function is onto
Why do we start with a y and not start with an x?
The enemy picks a y and we must defend ourselves with an x.
Let y be a real number.
{Secret side work:
y=2x+3
y-3 =2x
(y-3)/2 =x}
Let x = (y-3)/2.
f(x) = f((y-3)/2) =
2((y-3)/2)+3 =
y-3+3 =
y
Since y was arbitrary, this works for any y in the codomain.
x in dom(f)
f(x) = 2x+3
How to prove that a given function is NOT onto
Why is this enough to confirm that a function is NOT onto?
Because we only need to find one output that is not used to show it is not onto.
y = -1
Any real number, when squared will be greater than
or equal to 0. Thus, no x value will give f(x) = -1.
f(x) = x2
Definition of Isomorphism
We use the term "isomorphic" to express the idea that two groups are essentially the same (equivalent but not necessarily equal). So the group given by the mystery table is isomorphic to the symmetry group of an equilateral triangle.
Write a definition for isomorphic.
Definition: Let (G, •) and (H, *) be groups. G is isomorphic to H if…
There is a bijection f: G -> H such that for any a, b in G
f(a •b) = f(a)*f(b)
So if a•b = c f(a•b) =f(c)=f(a)*f(b)
Why do Isomorphisms NEED to be Bijections?
| 0 | R | RR | RRR |
0 | 0 | R | RR | RRR |
R | R | RR | RRR | 0 |
RR | RR | RRR | 0 | R |
RRR | RRR | 0 | R | RR |
| A | B | C | D |
A | D | C | B | A |
B | C | A | D | B |
C | B | D | A | C |
D | A | B | C | D |
The groups need to have the same number of elements in order to define the equivalence.
D = 0
A = RR
C = R
B = RRR
Proofs about Isomorphisms
Task 18: Proofs about Isomorphisms
Proofs about Isomorphisms Discussion
Proof Techniques Thus Far...
Direct Proof
Let x and y be odd integers, then xy is odd.
Assume x and y are odd integers. By the definition of odd, this means x = 2k + 1 for some integer k and y = 2j + 1 for some integer j. Thus, consider
xy = (2k + 1)(2j + 1)
= 4kj + 2j + 2k + 1
= 2(2kj + j + k) + 1
Since k and j are both integers and since the integers are closed under multiplication and addition, 2jk + j + k is itself an integer. Let z = 2jk + j + k. This means that xy = 2z + 1 where z is an integer. Thus, by definition, xy is odd.
Existential Proof
There exists an x such that P(x) is true.
There exist real numbers x and y such that |x+y| = |x|+|y|.
Constructive proof:
Let x = 1 and y = 2. Notice that both x and y are real numbers. Then |1+2| = |3| = 3 and |1|+|2| = 1 + 2 = 3.
Thus, there exist real numbers x and y such that |x+y| = |x|+|y|.
Non-constructive proof:
We will demonstrate that this works provided that x and y are both positive, both negative or both 0.
Case 1: Assume x and y are both positive real numbers.
Then |x+y| = x+y and, similarly, |x| = x and |y| = y so |x|+|y| = x+y. Thus, |x+y| = |x|+|y|.
Case 2: Assume x and y are both negative real numbers.
Then |x+y| = -x + -y and |x| = -x and |y| = -y so |x|+|y| = -x + -y
Thus, |x+y| = |x|+|y|.
Case 3: Assume x and y are both 0. Then |x+y| = 0 and |x| = 0 and |y| = 0 so |x|+|y| = 0+0 = 0. Thus, |x+y| = |x|+|y|.
Thus, there exist real numbers x and y that satisfy |x+y|=|x|+|y|.
Proof by Contradiction
Any group (G, *) must have a unique identity element.
Suppose for the sake of contradiction that G has two distinct identity elements, i and e. Consider the expression i * e.
Since i is an identity element, i * e = e. Since e is an identity element, i * e = i. But since * is a binary operation, i * e can only have one output. This is a contradiction. Thus, G must only have one identity element.
Disproof by Counterexample
If a and b are integers such that ab is divisible by 10 then either a is divisible by 10 or b is divisible by 10.
We will disprove this statement by providing a counterexample.
Let a = 4 and b = 5. Then ab = (4)(5) = 20. Note that 20 is divisible by 10 but neither 4 nor 5 are divisible by 10. Thus, the original statement is false.
There is one more big one we have not discussed or seen in practice yet...
Proof by Induction
For all integers x greater than or equal to a, P(x) is true.
P(a)
P(a+1)
P(a+2)
P(k)
P(k+1)
Task 19: Why does Induction Work?
Why does Induction Work?
Let’s try induction
If is an isomorphism between groups (G, *) and (H, #), then for any element a in G and any positive integer k, .
Homework
The assignment can be found on the google classroom under Classwork> Lesson 9 > Homework