Given any set X, let P(X) be the set of all subsets of X, and let {0,1}X be the set of all functions X→{0,1}. Construct a bijection (and its inverse) between P(X) and {0,1}X.
Let us define f:P(X)→{0,1}X by f(α)=gα where α∈P(X) and gα:X→{0,1} is defined by
gα(x)={1x∈α0x∈X−α
We need to check if this function is well-defined. Let α,β∈P(X). If α=β, then α and β correspond to the same set, and so correspond to the same function since both gα and gβ send that set to 1 and the (X−that set) to 0.
If we have a function gα∈{0,1}, then α is a set in X that is sent to 1. But since P(X) is the set of all sets of X, we must have α∈P(X). So the function is surjective.
Finally, if gα=gβ then both gα and gβ send the set α or β to 1. So α and β must be same set. In other words, the function is injective; and hence bijective.
The inverse function is f−1:{0,1}X→P(X) where f−1(gα)=α.
Another way to prove this is to first construct the inverse function, show that it is well defined, and then show that ff−1 and f−1f are the identity functions, right?
So if we let gα=gβ, then α=β, because otherwise gα(β)=0 and gβ(β)=1; a contradiction.
Now we have f∘f−1(gα)=f(α)=gα and f−1∘f(α)=f−1(gα)=α , and so f and f−1 must be bijective.
Answer
You need to show that the function f that you defined is a bijection.
In order to show that f is surjective, the argument you've posted begins by saying "If we have a function gα,…". But that notation presuposes that there is such an α, the very thing to be proved. I would say "If we have a function g on X (i.e. whose domain is X) taking values is {0,1}, then..." and set out to show there is some set α⊆X such that g=gα. You have to define that set by using the function g, without assuming in advance that such an α exists. And of course the set that will serve as α is {x∈X:g(x)=1}.
To show that f is one-to-one, you need to show that f(α)=f(β) ONLY if α=β. That's the same as saying if α≠β then f(α)≠f(β).
If α≠β then either there exists x∈α that is not a member of β or vice-versa. At this point you can observe that no generality is lost by assuming the first alternative: just call the one that has a member that the other one doesn't have "α". The think about gα(x) and gβ(x) where x is that one member.
No comments:
Post a Comment