Tell me more ×
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.

Lets say that if f(x) and g(x) are invertible.
1- is (f(x)+g(x)) also invertible? 2- is f(g(x)) invertible too?

for the first one lets say that f(x)=x and g(x)=-x then f(x)+g(x)=x+(-x)=0 and f(x)=0 is not invertible. so my conculusion is that f(x)+g(x) can be uninvertible if f(x) and g(x) are invertible. Am I right?

For the second one I have no clue.

share|improve this question

3 Answers

up vote 1 down vote accepted

I have no clue whether the following answers have made headway. As a result, I'll take a stab at this:

For (1), you had to provide an adequate counterexample.

Now, for (2), consider the following: Let $f$ be a function from set $X$ to set $Y$. Likewise, let $g$ be a function from set $Y$ to set $Z$. Thus, $g\circ f$ is a function from set $X$ to set $Z$. We see that $g\circ f$ has an inverse since we can perform $f^{-1}\circ g^{-1}$ to get back to $X$.

Let's decode that. Does it make more sense to think that $f$ is a bridge from place $X$ to place $Y$ and that $g$ is a bridge from place $Y$ to place $Z$? Well, if we have bridges back---that is, $g^{-1}$ being a bridge from place $Z$ to place $Y$ and $f^{-1}$ being a bridge from place $Y$ to place $X$---is it not self evident that to get from place $Z$ to place $X$ we simply take bridge $g^{-1}$ and then bridge $f^{-1}$, and we call this combined route $f^{-1}\circ g^{-1}$? :)


For sake of completeness, here's what I just said in the dry-Algebra language:

Let $f: X\to Y$ and $g: Y \to Z$. Thus, $g\circ f: X \to Z$.

If we have $f^{-1}: Y\to X$ and $g^{-1}: Z \to Y$, we have that $f^{-1}\circ g^{-1}: Z \to X$.

Letting the identity map be $I$, we have $f^{-1}\circ g^{-1}\circ g\circ f=I$. Therefore, $f^{-1}\circ g^{-1}$ is the inverse map of $g \circ f$.

share|improve this answer
+1 Very nicely expressed! – amWhy Nov 20 '12 at 0:16
Thank you! I completely fudged up the order of my $f$'s and $g$'s at first, but I have corrected that. – 000 Nov 20 '12 at 0:25
You'll get the hang of typesetting; it takes some getting used to! I still can't believe how quickly some users are able to post elaborate responses! – amWhy Nov 20 '12 at 0:27

HINT: You are right about (1). For (2), suppose that you know that $f\big(g(x)\big)$ is some particular number $y$. Does the invertibility of $f$ guarantee that in principle you can find $g(x)$? And what then does the invertibility of $g$ tell you?

share|improve this answer
so is this correct: f(x)=x^3 and g(x)=x^(2/3). Then f(g(x))=(x^(2/3))^3 which is f(g(x))=x^2 which is not invertible. – Muffin Nov 19 '12 at 21:20
@Alex90: Your $g$ isn’t invertible, so this example can’t tell you anything. If $f$ and $g$ are invertible, so is their composition; see if you can follow the hint to see how to explain why. – Brian M. Scott Nov 19 '12 at 21:27
Honestly I dont understand anything from your hint since im a beginner. 1st year in university. Why isnt g invertible? I get only one x for each y. – Muffin Nov 19 '12 at 21:38
@Alex90: $(-8)^{2/3}=(-2)^2=4=2^2=8^{2/3}$, so $g(-8)=g(8)$, and $g$ is not invertible. Look: if $f\big(g(x)\big)=y$, and $f$ is invertible, then isn’t it true that $g(x)=f^{-1}(y)$? Now keep going to find $x$. – Brian M. Scott Nov 19 '12 at 21:40

You are right about 1. 2 is correct provided $Range(g) \subseteq dom(f)$. In any case it has to be or else $f(g(x))$ would not be well defined.

share|improve this answer

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.