Mixing
Is my definition of functions correct?
$begingroup$
I'm planning to tackle all my work by learning all the definitions and statements relevant to my subjects by rewriting them in my own style. Below, I've stating the definition of a function in my own way using quantifiers. Can you please tell me if writing in this way is ok and correct? and if it makes logical sense? My work on self-teaching maths has never had the chance to be criticised which doesn't make me as confident as I would like. Also, is learning topics in maths by working with the definitions and important statements first by applying examples, non-examples, counter-examples first, then reading all relevant information in-between and the proofs later a better method of study?
Definition
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, is a rule such that $forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.
soft-question definition
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm planning to tackle all my work by learning all the definitions and statements relevant to my subjects by rewriting them in my own style. Below, I've stating the definition of a function in my own way using quantifiers. Can you please tell me if writing in this way is ok and correct? and if it makes logical sense? My work on self-teaching maths has never had the chance to be criticised which doesn't make me as confident as I would like. Also, is learning topics in maths by working with the definitions and important statements first by applying examples, non-examples, counter-examples first, then reading all relevant information in-between and the proofs later a better method of study?
Definition
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, is a rule such that $forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.
soft-question definition
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
How do you define “rule”? And what does $f(x)$ mean?
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 17:57
$begingroup$
would it be better to write 'consists of a rule' and ' $y=f(x)$, where $f(x)in{Y}$' ?
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:00
1
$begingroup$
The rule is '$forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.'
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:02
$begingroup$
Why better? If you don't define the meaning of rule, nothing will change.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 18:02
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm planning to tackle all my work by learning all the definitions and statements relevant to my subjects by rewriting them in my own style. Below, I've stating the definition of a function in my own way using quantifiers. Can you please tell me if writing in this way is ok and correct? and if it makes logical sense? My work on self-teaching maths has never had the chance to be criticised which doesn't make me as confident as I would like. Also, is learning topics in maths by working with the definitions and important statements first by applying examples, non-examples, counter-examples first, then reading all relevant information in-between and the proofs later a better method of study?
Definition
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, is a rule such that $forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.
soft-question definition
$endgroup$
I'm planning to tackle all my work by learning all the definitions and statements relevant to my subjects by rewriting them in my own style. Below, I've stating the definition of a function in my own way using quantifiers. Can you please tell me if writing in this way is ok and correct? and if it makes logical sense? My work on self-teaching maths has never had the chance to be criticised which doesn't make me as confident as I would like. Also, is learning topics in maths by working with the definitions and important statements first by applying examples, non-examples, counter-examples first, then reading all relevant information in-between and the proofs later a better method of study?
Definition
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, is a rule such that $forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.
soft-question definition
soft-question definition
asked Jan 21 at 17:55
user636392
1
$begingroup$
How do you define “rule”? And what does $f(x)$ mean?
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 17:57
$begingroup$
would it be better to write 'consists of a rule' and ' $y=f(x)$, where $f(x)in{Y}$' ?
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:00
1
$begingroup$
The rule is '$forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.'
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:02
$begingroup$
Why better? If you don't define the meaning of rule, nothing will change.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 18:02
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
How do you define “rule”? And what does $f(x)$ mean?
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 17:57
$begingroup$
would it be better to write 'consists of a rule' and ' $y=f(x)$, where $f(x)in{Y}$' ?
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:00
1
$begingroup$
The rule is '$forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.'
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:02
$begingroup$
Why better? If you don't define the meaning of rule, nothing will change.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 18:02
1
1
$begingroup$
How do you define “rule”? And what does $f(x)$ mean?
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 17:57
$begingroup$
How do you define “rule”? And what does $f(x)$ mean?
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 17:57
$begingroup$
would it be better to write 'consists of a rule' and ' $y=f(x)$, where $f(x)in{Y}$' ?
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:00
$begingroup$
would it be better to write 'consists of a rule' and ' $y=f(x)$, where $f(x)in{Y}$' ?
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:00
1
1
$begingroup$
The rule is '$forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.'
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:02
$begingroup$
The rule is '$forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.'
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:02
$begingroup$
Why better? If you don't define the meaning of rule, nothing will change.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 18:02
$begingroup$
Why better? If you don't define the meaning of rule, nothing will change.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 18:02
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Your definition of function is wrong in the first place because it carries a circular reference, hence is no definition.
If $f$ is yet to be defined then also $f(x)$ is yet to be defined and something that is not defined already cannot be used in a definition (unless it is some primitive notion that has no definition at all).
You cannot define function $f$ by means of $f$ or something depending on $f$ (in your case $f(x)$) itself.
A correct definition is:
- Function $f$ from set $X$ to set $Y$ is a subset of $Xtimes Y$ such that for every $xin X$ there is exactly one $yin Y$ with $langle x,yranglein f$.
Here $f$ is defined by means of cartesian product and ordered pair, which are supposed to be defined already.
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I really love the way you've defined a function this way. Most of the books I've been reading always define functions by using them in the definition, and I'm sure I've came across other definitions that use a similar structure which doesn't sit well with my intuition.
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:56
$begingroup$
Glad you like it. This definition is used commonly in set-theory. Also observe that on base of this definition we can now define $f(x)$: it is the unique $yin Y$ that satisfies $langle x,yranglein f$. If this is in your luggage then you can move on and also use terms as rules/prescription. Then the statement that e.g. function $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is "prescribed by the rule" $xmapsto x^2$ is just another way of saying that $f={langle x,x^2ranglemid xinmathbb R}$.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Jan 21 at 19:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While your definition encapsulates the "spirit" of the definition, it is not correct. A more formal and proper definition abandons the ambiguity of "rule:"
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, assigns to each $x in X$ a single element $f(x) in Y$, denoted $x mapsto f(x)$.
That's all that's really necessary.
You could alternatively use $y$ in lieu of $f(x)$, but the latter notation more clearly denotes $f(x)$ as being the image of $x$ under $f$ in my opinion.
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3082178%2fis-my-definition-of-functions-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Your definition of function is wrong in the first place because it carries a circular reference, hence is no definition.
If $f$ is yet to be defined then also $f(x)$ is yet to be defined and something that is not defined already cannot be used in a definition (unless it is some primitive notion that has no definition at all).
You cannot define function $f$ by means of $f$ or something depending on $f$ (in your case $f(x)$) itself.
A correct definition is:
- Function $f$ from set $X$ to set $Y$ is a subset of $Xtimes Y$ such that for every $xin X$ there is exactly one $yin Y$ with $langle x,yranglein f$.
Here $f$ is defined by means of cartesian product and ordered pair, which are supposed to be defined already.
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I really love the way you've defined a function this way. Most of the books I've been reading always define functions by using them in the definition, and I'm sure I've came across other definitions that use a similar structure which doesn't sit well with my intuition.
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:56
$begingroup$
Glad you like it. This definition is used commonly in set-theory. Also observe that on base of this definition we can now define $f(x)$: it is the unique $yin Y$ that satisfies $langle x,yranglein f$. If this is in your luggage then you can move on and also use terms as rules/prescription. Then the statement that e.g. function $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is "prescribed by the rule" $xmapsto x^2$ is just another way of saying that $f={langle x,x^2ranglemid xinmathbb R}$.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Jan 21 at 19:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your definition of function is wrong in the first place because it carries a circular reference, hence is no definition.
If $f$ is yet to be defined then also $f(x)$ is yet to be defined and something that is not defined already cannot be used in a definition (unless it is some primitive notion that has no definition at all).
You cannot define function $f$ by means of $f$ or something depending on $f$ (in your case $f(x)$) itself.
A correct definition is:
- Function $f$ from set $X$ to set $Y$ is a subset of $Xtimes Y$ such that for every $xin X$ there is exactly one $yin Y$ with $langle x,yranglein f$.
Here $f$ is defined by means of cartesian product and ordered pair, which are supposed to be defined already.
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I really love the way you've defined a function this way. Most of the books I've been reading always define functions by using them in the definition, and I'm sure I've came across other definitions that use a similar structure which doesn't sit well with my intuition.
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:56
$begingroup$
Glad you like it. This definition is used commonly in set-theory. Also observe that on base of this definition we can now define $f(x)$: it is the unique $yin Y$ that satisfies $langle x,yranglein f$. If this is in your luggage then you can move on and also use terms as rules/prescription. Then the statement that e.g. function $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is "prescribed by the rule" $xmapsto x^2$ is just another way of saying that $f={langle x,x^2ranglemid xinmathbb R}$.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Jan 21 at 19:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your definition of function is wrong in the first place because it carries a circular reference, hence is no definition.
If $f$ is yet to be defined then also $f(x)$ is yet to be defined and something that is not defined already cannot be used in a definition (unless it is some primitive notion that has no definition at all).
You cannot define function $f$ by means of $f$ or something depending on $f$ (in your case $f(x)$) itself.
A correct definition is:
- Function $f$ from set $X$ to set $Y$ is a subset of $Xtimes Y$ such that for every $xin X$ there is exactly one $yin Y$ with $langle x,yranglein f$.
Here $f$ is defined by means of cartesian product and ordered pair, which are supposed to be defined already.
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
$endgroup$
Your definition of function is wrong in the first place because it carries a circular reference, hence is no definition.
If $f$ is yet to be defined then also $f(x)$ is yet to be defined and something that is not defined already cannot be used in a definition (unless it is some primitive notion that has no definition at all).
You cannot define function $f$ by means of $f$ or something depending on $f$ (in your case $f(x)$) itself.
A correct definition is:
- Function $f$ from set $X$ to set $Y$ is a subset of $Xtimes Y$ such that for every $xin X$ there is exactly one $yin Y$ with $langle x,yranglein f$.
Here $f$ is defined by means of cartesian product and ordered pair, which are supposed to be defined already.
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
answered Jan 21 at 18:47
drhabdrhab
103k545136
103k545136
$begingroup$
I really love the way you've defined a function this way. Most of the books I've been reading always define functions by using them in the definition, and I'm sure I've came across other definitions that use a similar structure which doesn't sit well with my intuition.
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:56
$begingroup$
Glad you like it. This definition is used commonly in set-theory. Also observe that on base of this definition we can now define $f(x)$: it is the unique $yin Y$ that satisfies $langle x,yranglein f$. If this is in your luggage then you can move on and also use terms as rules/prescription. Then the statement that e.g. function $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is "prescribed by the rule" $xmapsto x^2$ is just another way of saying that $f={langle x,x^2ranglemid xinmathbb R}$.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Jan 21 at 19:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I really love the way you've defined a function this way. Most of the books I've been reading always define functions by using them in the definition, and I'm sure I've came across other definitions that use a similar structure which doesn't sit well with my intuition.
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:56
$begingroup$
Glad you like it. This definition is used commonly in set-theory. Also observe that on base of this definition we can now define $f(x)$: it is the unique $yin Y$ that satisfies $langle x,yranglein f$. If this is in your luggage then you can move on and also use terms as rules/prescription. Then the statement that e.g. function $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is "prescribed by the rule" $xmapsto x^2$ is just another way of saying that $f={langle x,x^2ranglemid xinmathbb R}$.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Jan 21 at 19:04
$begingroup$
I really love the way you've defined a function this way. Most of the books I've been reading always define functions by using them in the definition, and I'm sure I've came across other definitions that use a similar structure which doesn't sit well with my intuition.
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:56
$begingroup$
I really love the way you've defined a function this way. Most of the books I've been reading always define functions by using them in the definition, and I'm sure I've came across other definitions that use a similar structure which doesn't sit well with my intuition.
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:56
$begingroup$
Glad you like it. This definition is used commonly in set-theory. Also observe that on base of this definition we can now define $f(x)$: it is the unique $yin Y$ that satisfies $langle x,yranglein f$. If this is in your luggage then you can move on and also use terms as rules/prescription. Then the statement that e.g. function $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is "prescribed by the rule" $xmapsto x^2$ is just another way of saying that $f={langle x,x^2ranglemid xinmathbb R}$.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Jan 21 at 19:04
$begingroup$
Glad you like it. This definition is used commonly in set-theory. Also observe that on base of this definition we can now define $f(x)$: it is the unique $yin Y$ that satisfies $langle x,yranglein f$. If this is in your luggage then you can move on and also use terms as rules/prescription. Then the statement that e.g. function $f:mathbb Rtomathbb R$ is "prescribed by the rule" $xmapsto x^2$ is just another way of saying that $f={langle x,x^2ranglemid xinmathbb R}$.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Jan 21 at 19:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While your definition encapsulates the "spirit" of the definition, it is not correct. A more formal and proper definition abandons the ambiguity of "rule:"
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, assigns to each $x in X$ a single element $f(x) in Y$, denoted $x mapsto f(x)$.
That's all that's really necessary.
You could alternatively use $y$ in lieu of $f(x)$, but the latter notation more clearly denotes $f(x)$ as being the image of $x$ under $f$ in my opinion.
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While your definition encapsulates the "spirit" of the definition, it is not correct. A more formal and proper definition abandons the ambiguity of "rule:"
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, assigns to each $x in X$ a single element $f(x) in Y$, denoted $x mapsto f(x)$.
That's all that's really necessary.
You could alternatively use $y$ in lieu of $f(x)$, but the latter notation more clearly denotes $f(x)$ as being the image of $x$ under $f$ in my opinion.
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While your definition encapsulates the "spirit" of the definition, it is not correct. A more formal and proper definition abandons the ambiguity of "rule:"
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, assigns to each $x in X$ a single element $f(x) in Y$, denoted $x mapsto f(x)$.
That's all that's really necessary.
You could alternatively use $y$ in lieu of $f(x)$, but the latter notation more clearly denotes $f(x)$ as being the image of $x$ under $f$ in my opinion.
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
$endgroup$
While your definition encapsulates the "spirit" of the definition, it is not correct. A more formal and proper definition abandons the ambiguity of "rule:"
Let $X$ and $Y$ be sets. A function or mapping $f$ from a set $X$ to a set $Y$, denoted $f:Xrightarrow Y$, assigns to each $x in X$ a single element $f(x) in Y$, denoted $x mapsto f(x)$.
That's all that's really necessary.
You could alternatively use $y$ in lieu of $f(x)$, but the latter notation more clearly denotes $f(x)$ as being the image of $x$ under $f$ in my opinion.
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
answered Jan 21 at 18:02
Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer
7,57721338
7,57721338
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3082178%2fis-my-definition-of-functions-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
How do you define “rule”? And what does $f(x)$ mean?
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 17:57
$begingroup$
would it be better to write 'consists of a rule' and ' $y=f(x)$, where $f(x)in{Y}$' ?
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:00
1
$begingroup$
The rule is '$forall{x}in{X}, exists{y}in{Y}$ s.t $y=f(x)$.'
$endgroup$
– user636392
Jan 21 at 18:02
$begingroup$
Why better? If you don't define the meaning of rule, nothing will change.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
Jan 21 at 18:02