Proving that $fcolon mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ $frac{x}{1+x^2}$ is not an injection











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I needed help proving that this function is not an injection. I know that I can try a few $x$ values and see if I get the same output but I wanted a more rigorous proof using the definitions.



This is what I tried.



begin{align}
f(m)=f(p)
&implies frac{m}{1+m^2} = frac{p}{1+p^2} \
&implies m+mp^2 = p + pm^2 \
&implies m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)
end{align}



I don't really know where to go from here, how would I derive a contradiction showing that this is not injective?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    You could solve the quadratic $m+mp^2 = p + pm^2$ for either $p$ or $m$, then choose the other variable (more or less) freely.
    – Xander Henderson
    Nov 14 at 3:22















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I needed help proving that this function is not an injection. I know that I can try a few $x$ values and see if I get the same output but I wanted a more rigorous proof using the definitions.



This is what I tried.



begin{align}
f(m)=f(p)
&implies frac{m}{1+m^2} = frac{p}{1+p^2} \
&implies m+mp^2 = p + pm^2 \
&implies m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)
end{align}



I don't really know where to go from here, how would I derive a contradiction showing that this is not injective?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    You could solve the quadratic $m+mp^2 = p + pm^2$ for either $p$ or $m$, then choose the other variable (more or less) freely.
    – Xander Henderson
    Nov 14 at 3:22













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











I needed help proving that this function is not an injection. I know that I can try a few $x$ values and see if I get the same output but I wanted a more rigorous proof using the definitions.



This is what I tried.



begin{align}
f(m)=f(p)
&implies frac{m}{1+m^2} = frac{p}{1+p^2} \
&implies m+mp^2 = p + pm^2 \
&implies m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)
end{align}



I don't really know where to go from here, how would I derive a contradiction showing that this is not injective?










share|cite|improve this question















I needed help proving that this function is not an injection. I know that I can try a few $x$ values and see if I get the same output but I wanted a more rigorous proof using the definitions.



This is what I tried.



begin{align}
f(m)=f(p)
&implies frac{m}{1+m^2} = frac{p}{1+p^2} \
&implies m+mp^2 = p + pm^2 \
&implies m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)
end{align}



I don't really know where to go from here, how would I derive a contradiction showing that this is not injective?







functions proof-writing






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 14 at 15:46









Xander Henderson

13.8k93552




13.8k93552










asked Nov 14 at 3:17









Rufyi

647




647








  • 1




    You could solve the quadratic $m+mp^2 = p + pm^2$ for either $p$ or $m$, then choose the other variable (more or less) freely.
    – Xander Henderson
    Nov 14 at 3:22














  • 1




    You could solve the quadratic $m+mp^2 = p + pm^2$ for either $p$ or $m$, then choose the other variable (more or less) freely.
    – Xander Henderson
    Nov 14 at 3:22








1




1




You could solve the quadratic $m+mp^2 = p + pm^2$ for either $p$ or $m$, then choose the other variable (more or less) freely.
– Xander Henderson
Nov 14 at 3:22




You could solve the quadratic $m+mp^2 = p + pm^2$ for either $p$ or $m$, then choose the other variable (more or less) freely.
– Xander Henderson
Nov 14 at 3:22










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
7
down vote



accepted










Note that for $x ne 0$, we have $$frac{1/x}{1 + (1/x)^2} = frac{(1/x)(x^2)}{(1 + (1/x)^2)(x^2)} = frac{x}{x^2 + 1},$$ so if $f(x) = x/(1+x^2)$, then $f(1/x) = f(x)$ for all $x ne 0$.



An easier way to have seen this particular property of $f$ is to have written $$f(x) = frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{x/x}{1/x + x^2/x} = frac{1}{x + frac{1}{x}},$$ and now this relationship between $f(x)$ and $f(1/x)$ is laid bare.






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This is amazingly slick. I wouldn't've thought of this in a hundred years.
    – Randall
    Nov 14 at 3:25








  • 1




    @Randall It is actually not surprising that you wouldn't have thought of it. Unless you have seen problems like this before, it is not at all obvious that this kind of symmetry would show up. Once you know the trick, it is kind of slick to use it, but it takes some work to get there.
    – Xander Henderson
    Nov 14 at 3:47










  • @Randall: See my answer for how to derive the answer.
    – user21820
    Nov 14 at 5:11


















up vote
5
down vote













Hint let $f(x)=C$ for some constant $C$ chosen wisely. You then get $x=(1+x^2)C$ which is a quadratic with two solutions if you picked $C$ smartly.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    4
    down vote













    I would like to clear some of the smoke surrounding heropup's very slick–but somewhat mysterious–answer. The following solution is very elementary in the sense that it doesn't use anything more advanced than high school algebra (e.g. we don't make reference to the extreme value theorem or any other result from calculus), and in the sense that it doesn't try to do anything clever. The argument is a bit tedious because I am trying not to do anything that is even a little bit clever–I am just following my nose in the most naive way possible (which is what I would expect from most students).



    Suppose that there $f(x) = f(y)$ for some $x,yinmathbb{R}$ (where these two values are not assumed to be distinct). Then we have
    $$ frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{y}{1+y^2}
    implies x(1+y^2) = y(1+x^2)
    implies x y^2 - (1+x^2) + x = 0.$$

    This equation is quadratic in $y$, so, using the quadratic formula, we obtain
    begin{align} y
    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1+x^2)^2 - 4x^2}}{2x} \
    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{1-2x^2+x^4}}{2x} \
    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1-x^2)^2}}{2x} \
    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm (1-x^2)}{2x}.
    end{align}

    Therefore, simplifying the $pm$, we conclude that
    $$ y in left{ frac{(1+x^2) + (1-x^2)}{2x}, frac{(1+x^2) - (1-x^2)}{2x} right}
    = left{ frac{1}{x}, xright}.
    $$

    As long as $x ne 0$, we obtain two possible values of $y$: either $y=x$ (which is uninteresting, as our goal is to show that the function $f$ is not injective), or $y=frac{1}{x}$, which is interesting as it shows that it is possible for $f(x)$ to be equal to $f(y)$ even if $xne y$ (demonstrating a lack of injectivity). Indeed, what we have now shown is exactly heropup's solution. If we take $y=frac{1}{x}$, then we have
    $$
    f(y)
    = f(1/x)
    = frac{1/x}{1+(1/x)^2}
    = frac{x}{1+x^2}
    = f(x)
    $$

    for all $xne 0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer






























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      Actually, your attempt would have gotten you the answer if you had pushed a little further:



      $m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)$ yields $(p-m)(mp-1) = 0$, which you should automatically have found because you already know that one equality case is $p=m$ by symmetry and so can factor out $(p-m)$. This immediately tells you that you should try $m = 1/p$, which indeed works.






      share|cite|improve this answer




























        up vote
        1
        down vote













        Note that $f(0)=0$ and $lim_{x to infty} f(x)=0$. There is a unique local maximum at $x=1$ with value $1/2$, so this is an absolute maximum on $[0, +infty)$. Intuitively, the graph "begins" at $(0,0)$, goes up to $(1,1/2)$, then descends toward the $x$-axis in the long run. Such a function cannot be one-to-one for continuity reasons. (This is a little flabby, but can be made rigorous.)






        share|cite|improve this answer





















          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',
          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
          });


          }
          });














           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997722%2fproving-that-f-colon-mathbbr-to-mathbbr-fracx1x2-is-not-an-inj%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes








          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted










          Note that for $x ne 0$, we have $$frac{1/x}{1 + (1/x)^2} = frac{(1/x)(x^2)}{(1 + (1/x)^2)(x^2)} = frac{x}{x^2 + 1},$$ so if $f(x) = x/(1+x^2)$, then $f(1/x) = f(x)$ for all $x ne 0$.



          An easier way to have seen this particular property of $f$ is to have written $$f(x) = frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{x/x}{1/x + x^2/x} = frac{1}{x + frac{1}{x}},$$ and now this relationship between $f(x)$ and $f(1/x)$ is laid bare.






          share|cite|improve this answer



















          • 1




            This is amazingly slick. I wouldn't've thought of this in a hundred years.
            – Randall
            Nov 14 at 3:25








          • 1




            @Randall It is actually not surprising that you wouldn't have thought of it. Unless you have seen problems like this before, it is not at all obvious that this kind of symmetry would show up. Once you know the trick, it is kind of slick to use it, but it takes some work to get there.
            – Xander Henderson
            Nov 14 at 3:47










          • @Randall: See my answer for how to derive the answer.
            – user21820
            Nov 14 at 5:11















          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted










          Note that for $x ne 0$, we have $$frac{1/x}{1 + (1/x)^2} = frac{(1/x)(x^2)}{(1 + (1/x)^2)(x^2)} = frac{x}{x^2 + 1},$$ so if $f(x) = x/(1+x^2)$, then $f(1/x) = f(x)$ for all $x ne 0$.



          An easier way to have seen this particular property of $f$ is to have written $$f(x) = frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{x/x}{1/x + x^2/x} = frac{1}{x + frac{1}{x}},$$ and now this relationship between $f(x)$ and $f(1/x)$ is laid bare.






          share|cite|improve this answer



















          • 1




            This is amazingly slick. I wouldn't've thought of this in a hundred years.
            – Randall
            Nov 14 at 3:25








          • 1




            @Randall It is actually not surprising that you wouldn't have thought of it. Unless you have seen problems like this before, it is not at all obvious that this kind of symmetry would show up. Once you know the trick, it is kind of slick to use it, but it takes some work to get there.
            – Xander Henderson
            Nov 14 at 3:47










          • @Randall: See my answer for how to derive the answer.
            – user21820
            Nov 14 at 5:11













          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted






          Note that for $x ne 0$, we have $$frac{1/x}{1 + (1/x)^2} = frac{(1/x)(x^2)}{(1 + (1/x)^2)(x^2)} = frac{x}{x^2 + 1},$$ so if $f(x) = x/(1+x^2)$, then $f(1/x) = f(x)$ for all $x ne 0$.



          An easier way to have seen this particular property of $f$ is to have written $$f(x) = frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{x/x}{1/x + x^2/x} = frac{1}{x + frac{1}{x}},$$ and now this relationship between $f(x)$ and $f(1/x)$ is laid bare.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          Note that for $x ne 0$, we have $$frac{1/x}{1 + (1/x)^2} = frac{(1/x)(x^2)}{(1 + (1/x)^2)(x^2)} = frac{x}{x^2 + 1},$$ so if $f(x) = x/(1+x^2)$, then $f(1/x) = f(x)$ for all $x ne 0$.



          An easier way to have seen this particular property of $f$ is to have written $$f(x) = frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{x/x}{1/x + x^2/x} = frac{1}{x + frac{1}{x}},$$ and now this relationship between $f(x)$ and $f(1/x)$ is laid bare.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Nov 14 at 3:26

























          answered Nov 14 at 3:24









          heropup

          61.9k65997




          61.9k65997








          • 1




            This is amazingly slick. I wouldn't've thought of this in a hundred years.
            – Randall
            Nov 14 at 3:25








          • 1




            @Randall It is actually not surprising that you wouldn't have thought of it. Unless you have seen problems like this before, it is not at all obvious that this kind of symmetry would show up. Once you know the trick, it is kind of slick to use it, but it takes some work to get there.
            – Xander Henderson
            Nov 14 at 3:47










          • @Randall: See my answer for how to derive the answer.
            – user21820
            Nov 14 at 5:11














          • 1




            This is amazingly slick. I wouldn't've thought of this in a hundred years.
            – Randall
            Nov 14 at 3:25








          • 1




            @Randall It is actually not surprising that you wouldn't have thought of it. Unless you have seen problems like this before, it is not at all obvious that this kind of symmetry would show up. Once you know the trick, it is kind of slick to use it, but it takes some work to get there.
            – Xander Henderson
            Nov 14 at 3:47










          • @Randall: See my answer for how to derive the answer.
            – user21820
            Nov 14 at 5:11








          1




          1




          This is amazingly slick. I wouldn't've thought of this in a hundred years.
          – Randall
          Nov 14 at 3:25






          This is amazingly slick. I wouldn't've thought of this in a hundred years.
          – Randall
          Nov 14 at 3:25






          1




          1




          @Randall It is actually not surprising that you wouldn't have thought of it. Unless you have seen problems like this before, it is not at all obvious that this kind of symmetry would show up. Once you know the trick, it is kind of slick to use it, but it takes some work to get there.
          – Xander Henderson
          Nov 14 at 3:47




          @Randall It is actually not surprising that you wouldn't have thought of it. Unless you have seen problems like this before, it is not at all obvious that this kind of symmetry would show up. Once you know the trick, it is kind of slick to use it, but it takes some work to get there.
          – Xander Henderson
          Nov 14 at 3:47












          @Randall: See my answer for how to derive the answer.
          – user21820
          Nov 14 at 5:11




          @Randall: See my answer for how to derive the answer.
          – user21820
          Nov 14 at 5:11










          up vote
          5
          down vote













          Hint let $f(x)=C$ for some constant $C$ chosen wisely. You then get $x=(1+x^2)C$ which is a quadratic with two solutions if you picked $C$ smartly.






          share|cite|improve this answer

























            up vote
            5
            down vote













            Hint let $f(x)=C$ for some constant $C$ chosen wisely. You then get $x=(1+x^2)C$ which is a quadratic with two solutions if you picked $C$ smartly.






            share|cite|improve this answer























              up vote
              5
              down vote










              up vote
              5
              down vote









              Hint let $f(x)=C$ for some constant $C$ chosen wisely. You then get $x=(1+x^2)C$ which is a quadratic with two solutions if you picked $C$ smartly.






              share|cite|improve this answer












              Hint let $f(x)=C$ for some constant $C$ chosen wisely. You then get $x=(1+x^2)C$ which is a quadratic with two solutions if you picked $C$ smartly.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Nov 14 at 3:21









              Zachary Selk

              398211




              398211






















                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote













                  I would like to clear some of the smoke surrounding heropup's very slick–but somewhat mysterious–answer. The following solution is very elementary in the sense that it doesn't use anything more advanced than high school algebra (e.g. we don't make reference to the extreme value theorem or any other result from calculus), and in the sense that it doesn't try to do anything clever. The argument is a bit tedious because I am trying not to do anything that is even a little bit clever–I am just following my nose in the most naive way possible (which is what I would expect from most students).



                  Suppose that there $f(x) = f(y)$ for some $x,yinmathbb{R}$ (where these two values are not assumed to be distinct). Then we have
                  $$ frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{y}{1+y^2}
                  implies x(1+y^2) = y(1+x^2)
                  implies x y^2 - (1+x^2) + x = 0.$$

                  This equation is quadratic in $y$, so, using the quadratic formula, we obtain
                  begin{align} y
                  &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1+x^2)^2 - 4x^2}}{2x} \
                  &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{1-2x^2+x^4}}{2x} \
                  &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1-x^2)^2}}{2x} \
                  &= frac{(1+x^2) pm (1-x^2)}{2x}.
                  end{align}

                  Therefore, simplifying the $pm$, we conclude that
                  $$ y in left{ frac{(1+x^2) + (1-x^2)}{2x}, frac{(1+x^2) - (1-x^2)}{2x} right}
                  = left{ frac{1}{x}, xright}.
                  $$

                  As long as $x ne 0$, we obtain two possible values of $y$: either $y=x$ (which is uninteresting, as our goal is to show that the function $f$ is not injective), or $y=frac{1}{x}$, which is interesting as it shows that it is possible for $f(x)$ to be equal to $f(y)$ even if $xne y$ (demonstrating a lack of injectivity). Indeed, what we have now shown is exactly heropup's solution. If we take $y=frac{1}{x}$, then we have
                  $$
                  f(y)
                  = f(1/x)
                  = frac{1/x}{1+(1/x)^2}
                  = frac{x}{1+x^2}
                  = f(x)
                  $$

                  for all $xne 0$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer



























                    up vote
                    4
                    down vote













                    I would like to clear some of the smoke surrounding heropup's very slick–but somewhat mysterious–answer. The following solution is very elementary in the sense that it doesn't use anything more advanced than high school algebra (e.g. we don't make reference to the extreme value theorem or any other result from calculus), and in the sense that it doesn't try to do anything clever. The argument is a bit tedious because I am trying not to do anything that is even a little bit clever–I am just following my nose in the most naive way possible (which is what I would expect from most students).



                    Suppose that there $f(x) = f(y)$ for some $x,yinmathbb{R}$ (where these two values are not assumed to be distinct). Then we have
                    $$ frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{y}{1+y^2}
                    implies x(1+y^2) = y(1+x^2)
                    implies x y^2 - (1+x^2) + x = 0.$$

                    This equation is quadratic in $y$, so, using the quadratic formula, we obtain
                    begin{align} y
                    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1+x^2)^2 - 4x^2}}{2x} \
                    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{1-2x^2+x^4}}{2x} \
                    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1-x^2)^2}}{2x} \
                    &= frac{(1+x^2) pm (1-x^2)}{2x}.
                    end{align}

                    Therefore, simplifying the $pm$, we conclude that
                    $$ y in left{ frac{(1+x^2) + (1-x^2)}{2x}, frac{(1+x^2) - (1-x^2)}{2x} right}
                    = left{ frac{1}{x}, xright}.
                    $$

                    As long as $x ne 0$, we obtain two possible values of $y$: either $y=x$ (which is uninteresting, as our goal is to show that the function $f$ is not injective), or $y=frac{1}{x}$, which is interesting as it shows that it is possible for $f(x)$ to be equal to $f(y)$ even if $xne y$ (demonstrating a lack of injectivity). Indeed, what we have now shown is exactly heropup's solution. If we take $y=frac{1}{x}$, then we have
                    $$
                    f(y)
                    = f(1/x)
                    = frac{1/x}{1+(1/x)^2}
                    = frac{x}{1+x^2}
                    = f(x)
                    $$

                    for all $xne 0$.






                    share|cite|improve this answer

























                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      4
                      down vote









                      I would like to clear some of the smoke surrounding heropup's very slick–but somewhat mysterious–answer. The following solution is very elementary in the sense that it doesn't use anything more advanced than high school algebra (e.g. we don't make reference to the extreme value theorem or any other result from calculus), and in the sense that it doesn't try to do anything clever. The argument is a bit tedious because I am trying not to do anything that is even a little bit clever–I am just following my nose in the most naive way possible (which is what I would expect from most students).



                      Suppose that there $f(x) = f(y)$ for some $x,yinmathbb{R}$ (where these two values are not assumed to be distinct). Then we have
                      $$ frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{y}{1+y^2}
                      implies x(1+y^2) = y(1+x^2)
                      implies x y^2 - (1+x^2) + x = 0.$$

                      This equation is quadratic in $y$, so, using the quadratic formula, we obtain
                      begin{align} y
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1+x^2)^2 - 4x^2}}{2x} \
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{1-2x^2+x^4}}{2x} \
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1-x^2)^2}}{2x} \
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm (1-x^2)}{2x}.
                      end{align}

                      Therefore, simplifying the $pm$, we conclude that
                      $$ y in left{ frac{(1+x^2) + (1-x^2)}{2x}, frac{(1+x^2) - (1-x^2)}{2x} right}
                      = left{ frac{1}{x}, xright}.
                      $$

                      As long as $x ne 0$, we obtain two possible values of $y$: either $y=x$ (which is uninteresting, as our goal is to show that the function $f$ is not injective), or $y=frac{1}{x}$, which is interesting as it shows that it is possible for $f(x)$ to be equal to $f(y)$ even if $xne y$ (demonstrating a lack of injectivity). Indeed, what we have now shown is exactly heropup's solution. If we take $y=frac{1}{x}$, then we have
                      $$
                      f(y)
                      = f(1/x)
                      = frac{1/x}{1+(1/x)^2}
                      = frac{x}{1+x^2}
                      = f(x)
                      $$

                      for all $xne 0$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      I would like to clear some of the smoke surrounding heropup's very slick–but somewhat mysterious–answer. The following solution is very elementary in the sense that it doesn't use anything more advanced than high school algebra (e.g. we don't make reference to the extreme value theorem or any other result from calculus), and in the sense that it doesn't try to do anything clever. The argument is a bit tedious because I am trying not to do anything that is even a little bit clever–I am just following my nose in the most naive way possible (which is what I would expect from most students).



                      Suppose that there $f(x) = f(y)$ for some $x,yinmathbb{R}$ (where these two values are not assumed to be distinct). Then we have
                      $$ frac{x}{1+x^2} = frac{y}{1+y^2}
                      implies x(1+y^2) = y(1+x^2)
                      implies x y^2 - (1+x^2) + x = 0.$$

                      This equation is quadratic in $y$, so, using the quadratic formula, we obtain
                      begin{align} y
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1+x^2)^2 - 4x^2}}{2x} \
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{1-2x^2+x^4}}{2x} \
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm sqrt{(1-x^2)^2}}{2x} \
                      &= frac{(1+x^2) pm (1-x^2)}{2x}.
                      end{align}

                      Therefore, simplifying the $pm$, we conclude that
                      $$ y in left{ frac{(1+x^2) + (1-x^2)}{2x}, frac{(1+x^2) - (1-x^2)}{2x} right}
                      = left{ frac{1}{x}, xright}.
                      $$

                      As long as $x ne 0$, we obtain two possible values of $y$: either $y=x$ (which is uninteresting, as our goal is to show that the function $f$ is not injective), or $y=frac{1}{x}$, which is interesting as it shows that it is possible for $f(x)$ to be equal to $f(y)$ even if $xne y$ (demonstrating a lack of injectivity). Indeed, what we have now shown is exactly heropup's solution. If we take $y=frac{1}{x}$, then we have
                      $$
                      f(y)
                      = f(1/x)
                      = frac{1/x}{1+(1/x)^2}
                      = frac{x}{1+x^2}
                      = f(x)
                      $$

                      for all $xne 0$.







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited Nov 14 at 15:42

























                      answered Nov 14 at 4:00









                      Xander Henderson

                      13.8k93552




                      13.8k93552






















                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote













                          Actually, your attempt would have gotten you the answer if you had pushed a little further:



                          $m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)$ yields $(p-m)(mp-1) = 0$, which you should automatically have found because you already know that one equality case is $p=m$ by symmetry and so can factor out $(p-m)$. This immediately tells you that you should try $m = 1/p$, which indeed works.






                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                            up vote
                            2
                            down vote













                            Actually, your attempt would have gotten you the answer if you had pushed a little further:



                            $m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)$ yields $(p-m)(mp-1) = 0$, which you should automatically have found because you already know that one equality case is $p=m$ by symmetry and so can factor out $(p-m)$. This immediately tells you that you should try $m = 1/p$, which indeed works.






                            share|cite|improve this answer























                              up vote
                              2
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              2
                              down vote









                              Actually, your attempt would have gotten you the answer if you had pushed a little further:



                              $m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)$ yields $(p-m)(mp-1) = 0$, which you should automatically have found because you already know that one equality case is $p=m$ by symmetry and so can factor out $(p-m)$. This immediately tells you that you should try $m = 1/p$, which indeed works.






                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              Actually, your attempt would have gotten you the answer if you had pushed a little further:



                              $m(1+p^2) = p(1+m^2)$ yields $(p-m)(mp-1) = 0$, which you should automatically have found because you already know that one equality case is $p=m$ by symmetry and so can factor out $(p-m)$. This immediately tells you that you should try $m = 1/p$, which indeed works.







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered Nov 14 at 5:09









                              user21820

                              38k441149




                              38k441149






















                                  up vote
                                  1
                                  down vote













                                  Note that $f(0)=0$ and $lim_{x to infty} f(x)=0$. There is a unique local maximum at $x=1$ with value $1/2$, so this is an absolute maximum on $[0, +infty)$. Intuitively, the graph "begins" at $(0,0)$, goes up to $(1,1/2)$, then descends toward the $x$-axis in the long run. Such a function cannot be one-to-one for continuity reasons. (This is a little flabby, but can be made rigorous.)






                                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                                    up vote
                                    1
                                    down vote













                                    Note that $f(0)=0$ and $lim_{x to infty} f(x)=0$. There is a unique local maximum at $x=1$ with value $1/2$, so this is an absolute maximum on $[0, +infty)$. Intuitively, the graph "begins" at $(0,0)$, goes up to $(1,1/2)$, then descends toward the $x$-axis in the long run. Such a function cannot be one-to-one for continuity reasons. (This is a little flabby, but can be made rigorous.)






                                    share|cite|improve this answer























                                      up vote
                                      1
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      1
                                      down vote









                                      Note that $f(0)=0$ and $lim_{x to infty} f(x)=0$. There is a unique local maximum at $x=1$ with value $1/2$, so this is an absolute maximum on $[0, +infty)$. Intuitively, the graph "begins" at $(0,0)$, goes up to $(1,1/2)$, then descends toward the $x$-axis in the long run. Such a function cannot be one-to-one for continuity reasons. (This is a little flabby, but can be made rigorous.)






                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      Note that $f(0)=0$ and $lim_{x to infty} f(x)=0$. There is a unique local maximum at $x=1$ with value $1/2$, so this is an absolute maximum on $[0, +infty)$. Intuitively, the graph "begins" at $(0,0)$, goes up to $(1,1/2)$, then descends toward the $x$-axis in the long run. Such a function cannot be one-to-one for continuity reasons. (This is a little flabby, but can be made rigorous.)







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered Nov 14 at 3:24









                                      Randall

                                      8,49411128




                                      8,49411128






























                                           

                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded



















































                                           


                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2997722%2fproving-that-f-colon-mathbbr-to-mathbbr-fracx1x2-is-not-an-inj%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          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







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Plaza Victoria

                                          In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                                          How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...