2
$\begingroup$

I have to show that the following function $f: (0,1) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. I will use this function: $f(x)=\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{x-1}$.

To show 1-1, I am using $f(x_1)=f(x_2) \Rightarrow x_1=x_2$, where $x_1,x_2 \in (0,1)$.

To start off: $\frac{1}{x_1}+\frac{1}{x_1-1}=\frac{1}{x_2}+\frac{1}{x_2-1}$.

Then, I get: $\frac{(x_1-1)+x_1}{x_1(x_1-1)}=\frac{(x_2-1)+x_2}{x_2(x_2-1)}$.

This leads to: $\frac{2x_1-1}{x_1(x_1-1)}=\frac{2x_2-1}{x_2(x_2-1)}$.

Even after I cross-multiply after this step, I don't see where I can conclude that $x_1=x_2$.

Now,to show surjective, I'm a little confused as well, since rearranging the function to solve for $x$ like in simple cases is not working. Any hints/clues/examples will be appreciated. Thanks!

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you continue down your current route, you will get quadratics, typically with two apparent solutions of which one will be in $(0,1)$ $\endgroup$ – Henry Nov 18 '14 at 0:41
2
$\begingroup$

Calculus methods as suggested in other answers are good. If you want to do it without calculus, here is a possibility.

Continuing your working leads easily to $$2x_1x_2^2-2x_1^2x_2-x_2^2+x_1^2+x_2-x_1=0\ .$$ Now factorise the LHS. This might sound difficult, but remember that you want to show $x_1=x_2$, so you would hope that $x_1-x_2$ is a factor. And then you should notice that indeed if you take the first two terms, the next two and the last two, $x_1-x_2$ is a factor in every case. So we get $$(x_1-x_2)(-2x_2x_1)+(x_1-x_2)(x_1+x_2)-(x_1-x_2)=0$$ which then becomes $$(x_1-x_2)(-2x_1x_2+x_1+x_2-1)=0\ .$$ To conclude for certain that $x_1=x_2$ you need to explain why the second factor is not zero. Hint. We have $$-2x_1x_2+x_1+x_2-1=-\frac12\bigl((2x_1-1)(2x_2-1)+1\bigr)\ ,$$ and both $x_1$ and $x_2$ are in $(0,1)$.

To prove the function is surjective, try to solve $f(x)=a$ for any given real $a$. This simplifies to $$ax^2-(a+2)x+1=0\ .$$ Now call the LHS $q(x)$ and imagine the graph of $y=q(x)$. This is a continuous curve; since $q(0)=1$ it is above the $x$-axis when $x=0$; since $q(1)=-1$ it is below the axis when $x=1$; so it must cross the axis somewhere between $0$ and $1$, which gives the solution you need.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The last part uses calculus, doesn't it? $\endgroup$ – lhf Nov 18 '14 at 1:50
  • $\begingroup$ Is this factoring $(x_1−x_2)(2x_2−2x_1)$ correct? I thought it should be $-2x_1x_2(x_1-x_2)$. $\endgroup$ – H Cruz Nov 18 '14 at 1:53
  • $\begingroup$ @HCruz ooops, thanks, fixed. $\endgroup$ – David Nov 18 '14 at 2:35
2
$\begingroup$

Well, let us prove that $f(x)=\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{x-1}$ is 1-1. Assume that there exist two numbers $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ in $(0,1)$ such that $% f(x_{1})=f(x_{2}),$ then $$ \frac{2x_{1}-1}{x_{1}^{2}-x_{1}}=\frac{2x_{2}-1}{x_{2}^{2}-x_{2}} $$ and cross-multiplying yields $$ (2x_{1}-1)(x_{2}^{2}-x_{2})=(2x_{2}-1)(x_{1}^{2}-x_{1}) $$ Expanding both sides, we obtain $$ 2x_{1}x_{2}^{2}-(2x_{1}x_{2})-x_{2}^{2}+x_{2}=2x_{2}x_{1}^{2}-(2x_{2}x_{1})-x_{1}^{2}+x_{1} $$ canceling term between parentheses, and moving all the others to the left yields $$ 2x_{1}x_{2}^{2}-x_{2}^{2}+x_{2}-2x_{2}x_{1}^{2}+x_{1}^{2}-x_{1}=0 $$ Factoring this expression, we obtain \begin{eqnarray*} 2x_{1}x_{2}(x_{2}-x_{1})-(x_{2}-x_{1})(x_{2}+x_{1})+(x_{2}-x_{1}) &=&0 \\ (x_{2}-x_{1})(2x_{1}x_{2}-(x_{2}+x_{1})+1) &=&0 \end{eqnarray*} So now we have to show that for any $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ in $(0,1),$ $ (2x_{1}x_{2}-(x_{2}+x_{1})+1)\neq 0$ and then necessarly ($x_{2}-x_{1})=0,$ that is $x_{1}=x_{2}$ which completes the 1-1 proof.

Assume that there exist $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ both in $(0,1),$ such that $% (2x_{1}x_{2}-(x_{2}+x_{1})+1)=0,$ and let us prove that there is a contradiction.

Express $x_{2}$ in terms of $x_{1}:$ \begin{eqnarray*} 2x_{1}x_{2}-x_{2}-x_{1}+1 &=&0 \\ 2x_{1}x_{2}-x_{2} &=&1-x_{1} \\ x_{2}(2x_{1}-1) &=&1-x_{1}. \end{eqnarray*} If $x_{1}=\frac{1}{2},$ then $(x_{2})(0)=1-\frac{1}{2}=\frac{1}{2},$ so $0= \frac{1}{2}$ which is impossible. It follows that $x_{1}$ cannot be $\frac{1% }{2}.$ So for some $x_{1}\in \left( 0,\frac{1}{2}\right) \cup (\frac{1}{2},1) $ we have $$ x_{2}=\frac{1-x_{1}}{2x_{1}-1}. $$ If $x_{1}\in \left( \frac{1}{2},1\right) ,$ then $1-x_{1}>0$ and $1<2x_{1}<2$ which implies $1-2x_{1}<0.$ So, $x_{2}=\frac{1-x_{1}}{2x_{1}-1}=\frac{\oplus }{\ominus }<0.$ Then $x_{2}\in \left( -\infty ,0\right) $ and do not belong to $(0,1).$ Therefore, we should have $x_{1}\in \left( 0,\frac{1}{2}\right) $ (last chance!)

Assume that $x_1\in \left( 0,\frac{1}{2}\right) ,$ in this case, $0<2x_1<1$ and thus $1-2x_1>0.$ On the other hand $0<x_1<2x_1$, so $-x_1>-2x_1$ and $1-x_{1}>1-2x_{1}.$ And this last number is $>0.$ So, we can divide by $1-2x_{1}$ and get $\frac{1-x_{1}}{1-2x_{1}}>1,$ that is $% -x_{2}=\frac{1-x_{1}}{1-2x_{1}}>1,$ so $x_{2}<-1<0.$ In this case too, $x_{2} $ does not belong to $\left( 0,1\right)$, which is impossible. It follows that if $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ are both in $(0,1)$, then it is impossible to have $x_{2}(2x_{1}-1)=1-x_{1}.$

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

All you have to show is that, given $a \in \mathbb R$, the equation $f(x) = a$ has exactly one solution for $x \in (0,1)$.

This equation can be rearranged as $ax^2-(a+2)x+1 = 0$.

  • If $a = 0$, then it becomes $-2x+1 = 0$, which has the unique root $x=\frac12$ in $(0,1)$.
  • If $a \ne 0$, we have a quadratic equation that takes the value $1$ at $x=0$, and the value $-1$ at $x=1$. So again it has exactly one root in $(0,1)$.
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

There is another proof: Since the derivative is negative then the function is decreasing strictly, and since the limits at the boundary points (0 and 1) are +infinity and -infinity, then the function f is one-to-one and onto from (0,1) to R.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, that makes sense. Is there a name to this type of method? $\endgroup$ – H Cruz Nov 18 '14 at 0:16
  • $\begingroup$ this is based on the intermediate values theorem. $\endgroup$ – mookid Nov 18 '14 at 0:20
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry I do not know a name for this method. But I can precise the method: Look, because it is strictly decreasing on (0,1) then it is one-to-one, (no continuity is requered here) and because it is continuous over (0,1) AND the limits are +infinity and -infinity, then the range of the function is the whole R, so it is onto. $\endgroup$ – Idris Nov 18 '14 at 0:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The intermediate value thm serves for the proof of the ONTO part only, not the 1-1 part. $\endgroup$ – Idris Nov 18 '14 at 0:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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