I was wondering if my proof sufficiently answers this question.

A function $f: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is defined by $f(x) = 2x^3+3x^2-4.$ Find the range of $f$. Is $f$ one-to-one (injective)? Is $f$ onto (surjective)? Is $f$ a bijection? Give reasons for all your answers.

My solution:

  1. Range = All real $x$. (This is obvious - but what reason could I give for this?)

  2. $f$ is not injective. For an f to be injective, for every $y \in \mathbb{R}$ (codomain of $f$), there must be at most one $x \in \mathbb{R}$ (domain of $f$) such that $y = f(x)$. [Definition of injection].

    As $f(-\frac{3}{2}) = f(0) = -4$ and $-\frac{3}{2} \neq 0$, for a $y \in \mathbb{R}$ (codomain) there exists two different $x \in \mathbb{R}$ (domain). Hence $f$ is not injective.

    I just guessed the values, surely there must be another way?

  3. Clearly $f$ is continuous (It is obvious but what reason can I give?). Hence for every $y \in \mathbb{R}$ (codomain), there is at least one $x \in \mathbb{R}$ (domain) such that $y=f(x)$. [How can I better word this?]

  4. Can I now automatically say that since $f$ is not injective then $f$ is therefore not a bijection?

Feel free to comment on anything that can improve my reasoning skills. Thanks!

  • $\begingroup$ A couple of comments; firstly, you wrote the definition of injection incorrectly (the word "unique" is missing), and secondly, surjectivity has nothing to do with continuity (although $f$ is indeed continuous). Saying that the range is $\mathbb{R}$ is the same thing as saying that $f$ is surjective. $\endgroup$ – mdp Aug 19 '13 at 13:46
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you Matt, I fixed my definition of injection (should be correct now right)? So if you are saying for any function whose range is R, it will always be a surjective one? $\endgroup$ – Bobby Aug 19 '13 at 13:48
  • $\begingroup$ Your definition is now correct. Any function to $\mathbb{R}$ with range $\mathbb{R}$ is surjective - but the same formula defines a function $\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{C}$ which still has range $\mathbb{R}$ so is not surjective. In general, surjectivity means the range is equal to the codomain. $\endgroup$ – mdp Aug 19 '13 at 13:49

I don't think it is obvious that the range is all real $x$. I would argue continuity first as polynomials are continuous, then say it goes large and positive for large positive $x$ and large and negative for large negative $x$ and appeal to the intermediate value theorem. Maybe you have a theorem that polynomials of odd degree are surjective.

The unnumbered statement does show $f$ is not injective.

In 3, continuity does prove surjection onto the range, but I think the argument I gave in 1 is preferable.

For 4, yes, bijection requires both injection and surjection. Since you don't have injection you don't have bijection.

  • $\begingroup$ Are you sure? I'm pretty sure my definition of injection is correct? Would it also suffice to just say that all polynomials are continuous? $\endgroup$ – Bobby Aug 19 '13 at 13:56
  • $\begingroup$ I misread. You are correct. Fixed. Thanks $\endgroup$ – Ross Millikan Aug 19 '13 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ I guess in light of your comments on 3, I should clarify mine. While it is true that using continuity together with knowledge of the limits at each infinity provides a proof of surjectivity, it looks from the original question like the OP is trying to claim that continuous functions are necessarily surjective, hence my objections. $\endgroup$ – mdp Aug 19 '13 at 14:07
  • $\begingroup$ @Bobby Continuity of polynomials follows from the fact that the identity is continuous, together with the fact that continuity is a linear property (you may know this as the sum rule) and the product rule. So hopefully this is something you can just use without needing to say too much. $\endgroup$ – mdp Aug 19 '13 at 14:09

Try to show that for any arbitrary value there exists a number greater and less than it and then use the IVT. For example, $f(0)<0<f(2)$ and then use IVT to conclude there is an $x$ such that $f(x)=0$. Do this for an arbitrary number.

Is this a calculus class? If so, another way to show it is not injective is by using the derivative

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you! Well, it's a discrete mathematics class. I know you could differentiate it but I wanted to learn a different approach. Thanks! $\endgroup$ – Bobby Aug 19 '13 at 15:20

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.