Difference between revisions of "Passing to the quotient (function)"

From Maths
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Made the diagram a bit neater, added in some points to make it easier to remember)
m (Tidied up a bit, fixed a typo or two.)
Line 57: Line 57:
 
'''Uniqueness'''
 
'''Uniqueness'''
 
: Suppose another function exists, <math>\tilde{f}':W\rightarrow Y</math> that isn't the same as <math>\tilde{f}:W\rightarrow Y</math>
 
: Suppose another function exists, <math>\tilde{f}':W\rightarrow Y</math> that isn't the same as <math>\tilde{f}:W\rightarrow Y</math>
:: That means <math>\exists u\in W:[\tilde{f}(u)\ne\tilde{f}'(u)]</math> (and as {{M|w}} is ''surjective'' {{M|1=\exists x\in X[p(x)=u]}})
+
:: That means <math>\exists u\in W:[\tilde{f}(u)\ne\tilde{f}'(u)]</math>
:: Both {{M|\tilde{f} }} and {{M|\tilde{f}'}} have the property of <math>f=\tilde{f}\circ w=\tilde{f}'\circ w</math> so:
+
::* Note, as {{M|w:X\rightarrow W}} is [[surjective]], that {{M|1=\exists x'\in X[w(x')=u]}}
::: {{M|f(x)=\tilde{f}(p(x))=\tilde{f}'(p(x))}} by hypothesis, for all {{M|x}} however, we know {{M|\tilde{f} }} and {{M|\tilde{f}'}} don't agree over their entire domain, the {{M|p(x)}} they do not agree on violate this property (as {{M|f}} cannot be two things for a given {{M|x}})
+
:: However for both {{M|\tilde{f} }} and {{M|\tilde{f}'}} we have the property of <math>f=\tilde{f}\circ w=\tilde{f}'\circ w</math> so:
:: This contradicts that {{M|\tilde{f} }} and {{M|\tilde{f}'}} are different
+
::: By hypothesis we have: {{M|1=\forall x\in X[f(x)=\tilde{f}(w(x))=\tilde{f}'(w(x))]}} however we know:
 +
:::* {{M|1=\exists x'\in X[w(x')=u]}} and {{M|1=\tilde{f}(u)\ne \tilde{f}'(u)}}, this means:
 +
:::** {{M|1=f(x')=\tilde{f}(w(x'))\ne\tilde{f}'(w(x'))}} - which contradicts the hypothesis.
 +
:: However if {{M|w}} is not surjective, then the parts of the domain on which {{M|\tilde{f} }} and {{M|\tilde{f}'}} disagree on may never actually come up; that is to say:
 +
::* {{M|1=\forall x\in X[\tilde{f}(w(x))=\tilde{f}'(w(x))]}} as {{m|w:X\rightarrow W}} may never take an {{M|x\in X}} to a {{M|z\in W}} where {{M|\tilde{f}(z)}} and {{M|\tilde{f}'(z)}} differ; ''but'' they could still be different functions.
  
  

Revision as of 16:18, 10 July 2016

Definition

Given a function, f:XY and another function, w:XW (I have chosen W to mean "whatever") we can say:

f may be factored through w

if f and w are such that:

  • x,yX[w(x)=w(y)f(x)=f(y)]
    (this is the same as: x,yX[f(x)f(y)w(x)w(y)])

Then f induces a function, ˜f such that f=˜fw, or more simply that the following diagram commutes:

Diagram

Note:

  1. ˜f may be explicitly written as ˜f:WY by ˜f:vf(w1(v))
    • Or indeed ˜f:=fw1
    • This is actually an abuse of notation as w1(xW) is a subset of X, however it is safe to use it because (as is proved below) f of any element of w1(xW) for a given x is the same.
  2. The function ˜f is unique if w is surjective

Points to remember

  • Remembering the requirements:
    We want to induce a function ˜f:WY - if w(x)=w(y) then ˜f(w(x))=˜f(w(y)) just by composition.
    If f(x)f(y) we're screwed in this case. So it is easy to see that we must have [w(x)=w(y)][f(x)=f(y)] otherwise we cannot proceed.

Proof of claims

[Expand]

Claim: the induced function, ˜f exists and is given unambiguously by ˜f:vf(w1(v))

[Expand]

Claim: if w is surjective then the induced ˜f is unique

References

  1. Jump up to: 1.0 1.1 This is my (Alec's) own work