Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

enter image description here

I want "something" ("something" because maybe it is not really a mathematical function, called F in the above image) that can describe what is shown on the image. A given value from a domain Xi can be mapped to many values of domain X{i+1}, and for two values $x \neq x'$, then $F(x) \neq F(x')$

It also should be invertible, i.e. $F^{-1}$ exists.

Is it possible to have this ? If not, how can I have an alternative for this with something possible in the mathematics ? Maybe using a function where the elements of the codomain are vectors ? ...

EDIT: I'm not just seeking a name for that. Let's call it a "relation". I want to define a relation F that allow me to generate a set of numbers $y1, y2, y3$ given a number x (that is, F(x) = {y1, y2, y3}), and I want it to be invertible, that is $F^{-1}(y1) = x$, $F^{-1}(y2) = x$ and $F^{-1}(y3) = x$.

This numbers (elements of each domain $X_i$) may be natural, real, complex, or whatever ...

Also, note that the domains $X_i$ does not overlap, that is elements are unique: for any given element x from $X_i$, there is no element y in any other $X_j$ such that x=y.

share|improve this question
1  
Relations, do you maybe just seek a name for that? I'd call it left-total left-unique relation. –  k.stm Oct 3 '12 at 21:30
    
@K.Stm. I'm not just seeking a name for that. Ok let's call it a "relation". I want to define a relation that allow me to generate a set of numbers $y1, y2, y3$ given a number x (that is, F(x) = {y1, y2, y3}), and I want it to be invertible, that is $F^{-1}(y1) = x$, $F^{-1}(y2) = x$ and $F^{-1}(y3) = x$. –  shn Oct 3 '12 at 21:37
    
I understand that you donot only want $F(x)\ne F(x')$ for $x\ne x'$ but rather $F(x)\cap F(x')=\emptyset$. Then this is a (possibly infinite) rooted tree with $X_i=$ the set of vertices at level $i$. The inverse map is the "father" map –  Hagen von Eitzen Oct 3 '12 at 21:40
    
Possible duplicates: Create a unique numbers‌​, Deduce a unique number from number –  Hagen von Eitzen Oct 3 '12 at 21:45
    
Comparing with "Deduce a unique ...", it seems that (working with $\mathbb N_0$) letting $F(n)=\{kN+1,\ldots, k(N+1)\}$ with $F^{-1}(n)=\lfloor \frac{n-1}k\rfloor$ is one example of such a beast (for any fixed $k\in \mathbb N$). –  Hagen von Eitzen Oct 3 '12 at 21:51
add comment

2 Answers 2

up vote 0 down vote accepted

There is a concept called multivalued functions. A multivalued function from $X$ to $Y$ is often denoted by $f:X\leadsto Y$, and is really a map $f:X\to {\cal P}(Y)$ from $X$ to the power set of $Y$. You can of course add various constraints on $f$. I haven't seen the requirement of disjoint sets $f(x)$ and $f(x')$ for $x\neq x'$ that you desire, but then I'm more interested in cases where the sets $f(x)$ vary continuously with respect to $x$.

In fact, you can do serious analysis with multivalued functions, as described in Set-Valued Analysis by Aubin and Frankowska.

share|improve this answer
    
Is it possible to have an inverse function for the multivalued function, so that if the multivalued function is F(x) = {y,z,k} then $F^{-1}(y) = x, F^{-1}(z) = x, F^{-1}(k) = x$ ? For example if we take the "root square" function (or multivalued-function?) $\sqrt{4} = \{-2, 2\}$, then there is a convenient inverse function which is "squaring": $({-2})^2 = 4$, $2^2 = 4$. –  shn Oct 3 '12 at 22:45
add comment

Functions can be viewed as sets of ordered pairs - loosely, $f=\{(x,f(x)):x\in \mathcal{D}\}$ for some domain $\mathcal{D}$. The requirement that defines a function is that it gives a "good recipe" - that is, you plug an $x_0\in \mathcal{D}$ into it, it gives one and only one value $f(x_0)$, as to be non-ambiguous. In the ordered pairs picture of functions, this means that $f$ only contains one ordered pair with $x_0$ in the first position.

You wish to take away that requirement, so the object you want to make is not a function. But that's okay - we can still make things like that by viewing $f$ as a set of ordered pairs. Since you want $f^{-1}$ to exist, insist that any value $y$ in the codomain appears only once in the ordered pairs (just as we would require for a function to be one-to-one). In mathematical language $f$ is now simply a relation, not a function, but it does everything you'd like it to do.

Note that this works no matter which sets are your domain and codomain - it doesn't matter whether you're working with reals, complexes, or even numbers at all.

share|improve this answer
    
By the way, I should add that a simple version of what you're looking for is the square root "function." Square rooting a number $a$ yields two distinct solutions $\pm \sqrt{a}$, yet the inverse function (squaring) gives you the same number back for each. –  Alexander Gruber Oct 3 '12 at 22:07
    
Concerning your comment: Why the square root function is actually called "function" since yields two distance values ? Isn't it a multivalued function ? Furthermore ot have a convenient inverse which gives back the same number for each ! Don't you have another similar example of function which yields to more than two distinct solutions ? –  shn Oct 3 '12 at 22:38
    
Concerning your answer: since I want $f^{-1}$ to exist, that means for me that it is useless to have "pairs" (x, f(x)), because we can anyway have the value of x by doing it on $f^{-1}(f(x))$, then f(x) is sufficient to find out x, which means that we do not need to have pairs of (x, f(x)). It is very clear. –  shn Oct 3 '12 at 22:42
    
@shn I put "function" in quotation marks because square root is not actually a function, per se, for exactly the reasons you've said. A lot of times people define a square root function on the reals by (arbitrarily) choosing the positive value. This gets a bit more complicated when dealing with complex numbers or $n$-th roots, but the concept remains the same - the formally make these into a function, you have to pick a single value to use every time. –  Alexander Gruber Oct 4 '12 at 1:03
1  
You may have fun playing around with the complex logarithm en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_logarithm ! –  Bogdan Oct 4 '12 at 2:10
show 2 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.