anonymous
  • anonymous
Consider the following functions that map N into N: 1N(n) = n f(n) = 3n g(n) = n + (-1)^n h(n) = min{n, 100} k(n) = max{0, n-5} (a) Which of these functions are one-to-one? (b) Which of these functions map N onto N?
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
katieb
  • katieb
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • anonymous
1 Attachment
anonymous
  • anonymous
Hmm, what's the first function supposed to be? I haven't come across that notation before. Do you have a definition for it?
anonymous
  • anonymous
No, that is all that is given. =\

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

anonymous
  • anonymous
I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to help with that one then... For \(f(n)=3n\) (and the others, for that matter), use the definition of one-to-one: \[f(x_1)=f(x_2)~~\Rightarrow~~x_1=x_2\\ \text{(contrapositive of what you may have been shown: }x_1\not=x_2~~\Rightarrow~~f(x_1)\not=f(x_2).)\] So assume \(f(n_1)=f(n_2)\) for some \(n_1,n_2\in\mathbb{N}\): \[\begin{align*}f(n_1)&=f(n_2)\\ 3n_1&=3n_2\\ n_1&=n_2\end{align*}\] So the first function is one-to-one. To check if it is onto requires some simple reasoning. For any given \(n\), \(f(n)\) will always result with a multiple of 3. So this one isn't onto, since the multiples of 3 are only a subset of \(\mathbb{N}\).
anonymous
  • anonymous
By the way, were you told that \(\mathbb{N}=\left\{0,1,2,...\right\}\) or \(\mathbb{N}=\left\{1,2,...\right\}\) ? I only ask because if it's the latter, then the last function \(k(n)\) doesn't map from \(\mathbb{N}\) to \(\mathbb{N}\).
anonymous
  • anonymous
N = the set of positive integers: 1,2,3 ...
anonymous
  • anonymous
without the 0, right.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Okay. By the way, now that I think about it, it could be that \(1_\mathbb{N}(n)\) is just an arbitrary way of saying something like \(f(n)\). If that's the case, then you can apply the same exact reasoning for \(3n\). Assume \(f(n_1)=f(n_2)\) for some \(n_1,n_2\in\mathbb{N}\): \[\begin{align*}f(n_1)&=f(n_2)\\ n_1&=n_2\end{align*}\] So \(1_\mathbb{N}(n)\) is one-to-one. This function is onto, though, since for any \(n\in\mathbb{N}\) you plug in you get the same \(n\). The range of the function will be \(\mathbb{N}\), same as the target set.
anonymous
  • anonymous
so using that reasoning, I don't understand why all of the functions would not be one-to-one
anonymous
  • anonymous
Oh, disregard that thing I mentioned about \(k(n)\). I thought it said min, not max. And not all are one-to-one. Anyway, going down the list: \[g(n)=n+(-1)^n=\begin{cases}n-1&\text{for odd }n\\ n+1&\text{for even }n\end{cases}\]
anonymous
  • anonymous
If \(n_1\) is odd and \(n_2\) is even, then obviously \(g(n_1)\not=g(n_2)\), so you have to assume both are odd or both are even. \[\begin{align*}g(n_{1})&=g(n_2)\\ n_1\pm1&=n_2\pm1\\ n_1&=n_2\end{align*}\] So \(g(n) \) is indeed one-to-one. It's not onto, though. What happens when \(n=1\)?
anonymous
  • anonymous
You get 0?
anonymous
  • anonymous
Right. Not in the natural numbers, so the function isn't even well defined.
anonymous
  • anonymous
The next one's pretty easy. \[h(n)=\min\left\{n,100\right\}=\begin{cases}n&\text{for }n<100\\100&\text{for }n\ge100\end{cases}\] What do you think?
anonymous
  • anonymous
h(n1) = h(n2)
anonymous
  • anonymous
That's about as far as I get =\ I don't really understand the concept of one-to-one
anonymous
  • anonymous
Consider the values of \(n\) one case at a time. Let say \(n_1<100\) and \(n_2<100\). Then you have \(h(n_1)=n_1\) and \(h(n_2)=n_2\), right? So for this case, \(h(n)\) is one-to-one, provided that \(h(n_1)\not=h(n_2)\), as per the definition. For \(n_1,n_2\ge100\), you have \(h(n_1)=h(n_2)=100\). So it's not one-to-one, since there are two values of \(n\) that give the same output. ("two-to-one" as opposed to "one-to-one") It's not onto either, since for \(n\ge100\), the output doesn't get higher than 100, thus leaving out all the other natural numbers. Make sense?
anonymous
  • anonymous
Kind of makes sense.
anonymous
  • anonymous
What specifically are you having trouble with?
anonymous
  • anonymous
so for an earlier problem you say g(n1)n1±1n1=g(n2)=n2±1=n2 but in this problem h(n1)=n1 and h(n2)=n2 and n1<100 and n2<100 so wouldn't that mean n1 = n2? so I don't get why h(n1)≠h(n2)
anonymous
  • anonymous
in the first problem n1 = n2
anonymous
  • anonymous
For \(g(n)\), I assume \(g(n_1)=g(n_2)\) and showed that \(n_1=n_2\), meaning that for two equal outputs, you have that the inputs are the same. If \(n_1,n_2\) are odd, then \(g(n_1)=n_1-1\), likwise for \(n_2\). Similarly, if they're even, then \(g(n_1)=n_1+1\), and likewise for \(n_2\). So if \(g(n_1)=g(n_2)\), then \(n_1-1=n_2-1\) or \(n_1+1=n_2+1\), or more succintly, \(n_1\pm1=n_2\pm1\), which gives you \(n_1=n_2\). So \(g\) is one-to-one.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Note that \(g\) was dealt with case-wise. I did the same for \(h\). \(\min\{n,100\}\) is the smallest number between \(n\) and 100, which is either \(n\) or 100. Take the first case: If \(n<100\), then \(\min\{n,100\}\) must be \(n\), right? So we then assume \(h(n_1)=h(n_2)\) \(\color{red}{\text{for some }n_1,n_2<100}\). Then \(h(n_1)=n_1\) and \(h(n_2)=n_2\). This means that \(n_1=n_2\), so the function is one-to -one *for this case only*.
anonymous
  • anonymous
so for the same inputs, the outputs must be the same on both sides of the equation for the function to be one to one? I don't get what the difference is between n1 and n2 in h(n)
anonymous
  • anonymous
Yes. Given that two outputs are the same, you have to show that the two inputs used to get that output are the same as well. In other words \(f(a)=f(b)\) is only true if \(a=b\). \(f(a),f(b)\) are the outputs, \(a,b\) are the inputs.
anonymous
  • anonymous
In \(h(n)\), whether there is a difference between \(n_1\) and \(n_2\) depends entirely on what \(h(n_1)\) and \(h(n_2)\) are. Like I said earlier, if both \(n_1\) and \(n_2\) are less than 100, then their associated outputs are \(h(n_1)=n_1\) and \(h(n_2)=n_2\). If \(h(n_1)=h(n_2)\), then you necessarily have \(n_1=n_2\), and so \(h\) is one-to-one ONLY if \(n_1\) and \(n_2\) are less than 100.
anonymous
  • anonymous
For the second case, a simple counter-example suffices to show that \(h\) isn't one-to-one. Take \(n_1=100\) and \(n_2=101\). Then \(h(100)=h(101)=100\). You have two inputs that give the same output. \(h\) is thus not one-to-one.
anonymous
  • anonymous
so if different inputs give the same output the function is not one-to-one. But if the same inputs give the same output the function is one-to-one?
anonymous
  • anonymous
If *only* the same inputs give the same output, the function is one-to-one.
anonymous
  • anonymous
ah ok that makes sense.
anonymous
  • anonymous
So for k(n) = max{0, n-5} would we need to do same thing for each of the cases?
anonymous
  • anonymous
The problem with this function is that it's not well-defined. It doesn't map from \(\mathbb{N}\) to \(\mathbb{N}\). For \(n\le5\), you have \(\max\{0,n-5\}\le0\). \[k(n)=\max\{0,n-5\}=\begin{cases}0&\text{for }n\le5&&\text{(this is the poorly-defined part)}\\ n-5&\text{for }n>5\end{cases}\] But yes, you would need to check case-by-case.
anonymous
  • anonymous
so we say n1 <= 5 and n2 <= 5. Then we have k(n1) = n1 and k(n2) = n2?
anonymous
  • anonymous
which means that it is one-to-one for the first case?
anonymous
  • anonymous
No, not quite. \(k(n_1)=k(n_2)=0\), by the definition of \(k\).
anonymous
  • anonymous
oh right
anonymous
  • anonymous
Now supposing we have \(n_1\not=n_2\), we still have that \(k(n_1)=k(n_2)\). Same output for different inputs. So not one-to-one.
anonymous
  • anonymous
so would it map N onto N?
anonymous
  • anonymous
Why do you think so? I want to see your reasoning.
anonymous
  • anonymous
I don't think it would be.
anonymous
  • anonymous
I don't really know how to show it isn't
anonymous
  • anonymous
I don't know, I don't understand how to know if a function maps N onto N either :(
anonymous
  • anonymous
I would say it is. \(n-5\) gives you all natural numbers, provided that \(n>5\), of course. It's the same reason for why \(1_\mathbb{N}(n)\) was onto.
anonymous
  • anonymous
hmm, ok, so was h(n) onto then?
anonymous
  • anonymous
Alright, well I think I'm starting to understand one-to-one a little better now. I will look over it some more and see if I can understand everything that is happening. Sorry to take so much time, and thank you so much for all the help and for putting up with my stupidity! :)
anonymous
  • anonymous
Yeah, it's onto. Not a problem, happy to help!

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.