Trouble proving that if $A approx B$ then $A^C approx B^C$












1












$begingroup$



Show that if $A approx B$ then $A^C approx B^C$




According to my textbook, $A^C$ is the set of all functions from $C$ to $A$, ie. $A^C={Fin mathscr P(Y times X): F$ is a function$}$.



So I need to prove that there is a function $g: A^C to B^C$ that is one-one and onto. ie. For one-one, assume $g(h)=g(h')$ where $h$ is a function in $A^C$, and show that $h=h'$. Also assume that there is a $f: Ato B$ that is one-one and onto.



I am stuck because I have no idea how to define $g$; I think this is partly because I am slightly confused by what the definition of $g: A^C to B^C$ is. I know it is a set of functions, but what exactly does that mean/ what does a member look like? Is it a set of ordered pairs consisting of functions? eg. $<f,g>$?



Also it seems that some info about $C$'s relation to other sets is needed, but is not provided.



Could anyone help or point me at the right direction please?



(Schröder–Bernstein theorem is available, but I am not sure if it will be useful here)










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$



    Show that if $A approx B$ then $A^C approx B^C$




    According to my textbook, $A^C$ is the set of all functions from $C$ to $A$, ie. $A^C={Fin mathscr P(Y times X): F$ is a function$}$.



    So I need to prove that there is a function $g: A^C to B^C$ that is one-one and onto. ie. For one-one, assume $g(h)=g(h')$ where $h$ is a function in $A^C$, and show that $h=h'$. Also assume that there is a $f: Ato B$ that is one-one and onto.



    I am stuck because I have no idea how to define $g$; I think this is partly because I am slightly confused by what the definition of $g: A^C to B^C$ is. I know it is a set of functions, but what exactly does that mean/ what does a member look like? Is it a set of ordered pairs consisting of functions? eg. $<f,g>$?



    Also it seems that some info about $C$'s relation to other sets is needed, but is not provided.



    Could anyone help or point me at the right direction please?



    (Schröder–Bernstein theorem is available, but I am not sure if it will be useful here)










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1


      0



      $begingroup$



      Show that if $A approx B$ then $A^C approx B^C$




      According to my textbook, $A^C$ is the set of all functions from $C$ to $A$, ie. $A^C={Fin mathscr P(Y times X): F$ is a function$}$.



      So I need to prove that there is a function $g: A^C to B^C$ that is one-one and onto. ie. For one-one, assume $g(h)=g(h')$ where $h$ is a function in $A^C$, and show that $h=h'$. Also assume that there is a $f: Ato B$ that is one-one and onto.



      I am stuck because I have no idea how to define $g$; I think this is partly because I am slightly confused by what the definition of $g: A^C to B^C$ is. I know it is a set of functions, but what exactly does that mean/ what does a member look like? Is it a set of ordered pairs consisting of functions? eg. $<f,g>$?



      Also it seems that some info about $C$'s relation to other sets is needed, but is not provided.



      Could anyone help or point me at the right direction please?



      (Schröder–Bernstein theorem is available, but I am not sure if it will be useful here)










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$





      Show that if $A approx B$ then $A^C approx B^C$




      According to my textbook, $A^C$ is the set of all functions from $C$ to $A$, ie. $A^C={Fin mathscr P(Y times X): F$ is a function$}$.



      So I need to prove that there is a function $g: A^C to B^C$ that is one-one and onto. ie. For one-one, assume $g(h)=g(h')$ where $h$ is a function in $A^C$, and show that $h=h'$. Also assume that there is a $f: Ato B$ that is one-one and onto.



      I am stuck because I have no idea how to define $g$; I think this is partly because I am slightly confused by what the definition of $g: A^C to B^C$ is. I know it is a set of functions, but what exactly does that mean/ what does a member look like? Is it a set of ordered pairs consisting of functions? eg. $<f,g>$?



      Also it seems that some info about $C$'s relation to other sets is needed, but is not provided.



      Could anyone help or point me at the right direction please?



      (Schröder–Bernstein theorem is available, but I am not sure if it will be useful here)







      elementary-set-theory






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 30 '18 at 23:36









      Eric Wofsey

      187k14216344




      187k14216344










      asked Dec 30 '18 at 23:05









      Daniel MakDaniel Mak

      483416




      483416






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Technically functions can be modeled by certain sets of pairs, but that is not a very productive intuition about what is going on for your purpose here.



          I think it is more fruitful to think of a function $Xto Y$ as a machine with the property that when you put an element of $X$ into it, somehow an element of $Y$ comes out the other end -- and this happens in a repeatable fashion such that if you put the same element of $X$ into the machine multiple times, the same element of $Y$ will be produced several times.



          When you're looking for a function $g:A^C to B^C$, then you want to constructs a machine that makes machines into other machines. The input to your $g$ will be a machine $Cto A$. You want use that to produce a machine $Cto B$.



          The natural way to do that will be to bolt the $Cto A$ machine you get as input together with a copy of the the $f:Ato B$ you have assumed exists. The combined machine will first use the input to convert the incoming $c$ into an $a$, and then use $f$ to convert the $a$ into a $b$. The net effect is that something from $C$ comes in and something from $B$ comes out -- in other words we do get a function $Cto B$.



          Once you have used the machine analogy to work out what your $g$ should do, you can go back to symbolic reasoning to try to prove that this $g$ is actually a bijection.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you that approach is really useful; appreciate it. If I understand correctly, I am supposed to define $g$ to be $fcirc h: A^Cto B^C$ (where $h: Cto A$), and show that if $f(h(c))=f(h(c'))$ then $ c=c'$. But doesn't this mean that the input of $g$ is an element $c in C$, instead of a function $Cto A$?
            $endgroup$
            – Daniel Mak
            Dec 31 '18 at 15:48












          • $begingroup$
            I am also stuck on how to proceed; by the fact that $f$ is one-one, I can prove that $h(c)=h(c')$, but without any info about $h$ (do I have to define it in a specific way?) I can't really prove $c=c'$
            $endgroup$
            – Daniel Mak
            Dec 31 '18 at 15:52






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @DanielMak:No, you would define $g(h) = fcirc h$ (not $g=fcirc h$ which is nonsense). And the function you need to prove is a bijection is $g$ itself, not the function that $g$ outputs. In other words, for injectivity you need to prove that if $g(h_1)=g(h_2)$ then $h_1=h_2$ -- which is to say, if $fcirc h_1$ and $fcirc h_2$ are the same function, then $h_1$and $h_2$ must have been the same function to begin with.
            $endgroup$
            – Henning Makholm
            Dec 31 '18 at 16:18



















          2












          $begingroup$

          Given an element of $A^C,$ it is some map $u:C to A.$ Then define $g(u):C to B$ by composition. That is, $g(u)(c)=f(u(c)).$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            2












            $begingroup$

            Since A$approx$B, there exists a one-to-one onto function f:A$rightarrow$B. That is the key to the exercise.



            Let $phiin A^C$. Then f$circ phi$:C$rightarrow$B. So we define a function $psi_f$:$A^C rightarrow B^C$ such that $phi mapsto fcircphi$.



            1:$psi_f$ is onto. Let g$in B^C$. Then $f^{-1}circ g in A^C$. So
            $$psi_f(f^{-1} circ g) = f circ f^{-1} circ g = g. checkmark $$



            2.$psi_f$ is one-to-one. Suppose $phi_1,phi_2 in A^C$ such that $f circ psi_1 = f circ psi_2$. Thus for every c $in$ C, then
            $$f(psi_1(c)) = f(psi_2(c))$$
            But since f is invertible, that forces
            $$psi_1(c) = psi_2(c)text{ } forall c checkmark$$






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













              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
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057266%2ftrouble-proving-that-if-a-approx-b-then-ac-approx-bc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              2












              $begingroup$

              Technically functions can be modeled by certain sets of pairs, but that is not a very productive intuition about what is going on for your purpose here.



              I think it is more fruitful to think of a function $Xto Y$ as a machine with the property that when you put an element of $X$ into it, somehow an element of $Y$ comes out the other end -- and this happens in a repeatable fashion such that if you put the same element of $X$ into the machine multiple times, the same element of $Y$ will be produced several times.



              When you're looking for a function $g:A^C to B^C$, then you want to constructs a machine that makes machines into other machines. The input to your $g$ will be a machine $Cto A$. You want use that to produce a machine $Cto B$.



              The natural way to do that will be to bolt the $Cto A$ machine you get as input together with a copy of the the $f:Ato B$ you have assumed exists. The combined machine will first use the input to convert the incoming $c$ into an $a$, and then use $f$ to convert the $a$ into a $b$. The net effect is that something from $C$ comes in and something from $B$ comes out -- in other words we do get a function $Cto B$.



              Once you have used the machine analogy to work out what your $g$ should do, you can go back to symbolic reasoning to try to prove that this $g$ is actually a bijection.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                Thank you that approach is really useful; appreciate it. If I understand correctly, I am supposed to define $g$ to be $fcirc h: A^Cto B^C$ (where $h: Cto A$), and show that if $f(h(c))=f(h(c'))$ then $ c=c'$. But doesn't this mean that the input of $g$ is an element $c in C$, instead of a function $Cto A$?
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:48












              • $begingroup$
                I am also stuck on how to proceed; by the fact that $f$ is one-one, I can prove that $h(c)=h(c')$, but without any info about $h$ (do I have to define it in a specific way?) I can't really prove $c=c'$
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:52






              • 1




                $begingroup$
                @DanielMak:No, you would define $g(h) = fcirc h$ (not $g=fcirc h$ which is nonsense). And the function you need to prove is a bijection is $g$ itself, not the function that $g$ outputs. In other words, for injectivity you need to prove that if $g(h_1)=g(h_2)$ then $h_1=h_2$ -- which is to say, if $fcirc h_1$ and $fcirc h_2$ are the same function, then $h_1$and $h_2$ must have been the same function to begin with.
                $endgroup$
                – Henning Makholm
                Dec 31 '18 at 16:18
















              2












              $begingroup$

              Technically functions can be modeled by certain sets of pairs, but that is not a very productive intuition about what is going on for your purpose here.



              I think it is more fruitful to think of a function $Xto Y$ as a machine with the property that when you put an element of $X$ into it, somehow an element of $Y$ comes out the other end -- and this happens in a repeatable fashion such that if you put the same element of $X$ into the machine multiple times, the same element of $Y$ will be produced several times.



              When you're looking for a function $g:A^C to B^C$, then you want to constructs a machine that makes machines into other machines. The input to your $g$ will be a machine $Cto A$. You want use that to produce a machine $Cto B$.



              The natural way to do that will be to bolt the $Cto A$ machine you get as input together with a copy of the the $f:Ato B$ you have assumed exists. The combined machine will first use the input to convert the incoming $c$ into an $a$, and then use $f$ to convert the $a$ into a $b$. The net effect is that something from $C$ comes in and something from $B$ comes out -- in other words we do get a function $Cto B$.



              Once you have used the machine analogy to work out what your $g$ should do, you can go back to symbolic reasoning to try to prove that this $g$ is actually a bijection.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                Thank you that approach is really useful; appreciate it. If I understand correctly, I am supposed to define $g$ to be $fcirc h: A^Cto B^C$ (where $h: Cto A$), and show that if $f(h(c))=f(h(c'))$ then $ c=c'$. But doesn't this mean that the input of $g$ is an element $c in C$, instead of a function $Cto A$?
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:48












              • $begingroup$
                I am also stuck on how to proceed; by the fact that $f$ is one-one, I can prove that $h(c)=h(c')$, but without any info about $h$ (do I have to define it in a specific way?) I can't really prove $c=c'$
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:52






              • 1




                $begingroup$
                @DanielMak:No, you would define $g(h) = fcirc h$ (not $g=fcirc h$ which is nonsense). And the function you need to prove is a bijection is $g$ itself, not the function that $g$ outputs. In other words, for injectivity you need to prove that if $g(h_1)=g(h_2)$ then $h_1=h_2$ -- which is to say, if $fcirc h_1$ and $fcirc h_2$ are the same function, then $h_1$and $h_2$ must have been the same function to begin with.
                $endgroup$
                – Henning Makholm
                Dec 31 '18 at 16:18














              2












              2








              2





              $begingroup$

              Technically functions can be modeled by certain sets of pairs, but that is not a very productive intuition about what is going on for your purpose here.



              I think it is more fruitful to think of a function $Xto Y$ as a machine with the property that when you put an element of $X$ into it, somehow an element of $Y$ comes out the other end -- and this happens in a repeatable fashion such that if you put the same element of $X$ into the machine multiple times, the same element of $Y$ will be produced several times.



              When you're looking for a function $g:A^C to B^C$, then you want to constructs a machine that makes machines into other machines. The input to your $g$ will be a machine $Cto A$. You want use that to produce a machine $Cto B$.



              The natural way to do that will be to bolt the $Cto A$ machine you get as input together with a copy of the the $f:Ato B$ you have assumed exists. The combined machine will first use the input to convert the incoming $c$ into an $a$, and then use $f$ to convert the $a$ into a $b$. The net effect is that something from $C$ comes in and something from $B$ comes out -- in other words we do get a function $Cto B$.



              Once you have used the machine analogy to work out what your $g$ should do, you can go back to symbolic reasoning to try to prove that this $g$ is actually a bijection.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              Technically functions can be modeled by certain sets of pairs, but that is not a very productive intuition about what is going on for your purpose here.



              I think it is more fruitful to think of a function $Xto Y$ as a machine with the property that when you put an element of $X$ into it, somehow an element of $Y$ comes out the other end -- and this happens in a repeatable fashion such that if you put the same element of $X$ into the machine multiple times, the same element of $Y$ will be produced several times.



              When you're looking for a function $g:A^C to B^C$, then you want to constructs a machine that makes machines into other machines. The input to your $g$ will be a machine $Cto A$. You want use that to produce a machine $Cto B$.



              The natural way to do that will be to bolt the $Cto A$ machine you get as input together with a copy of the the $f:Ato B$ you have assumed exists. The combined machine will first use the input to convert the incoming $c$ into an $a$, and then use $f$ to convert the $a$ into a $b$. The net effect is that something from $C$ comes in and something from $B$ comes out -- in other words we do get a function $Cto B$.



              Once you have used the machine analogy to work out what your $g$ should do, you can go back to symbolic reasoning to try to prove that this $g$ is actually a bijection.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Dec 30 '18 at 23:34









              Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

              241k17308546




              241k17308546












              • $begingroup$
                Thank you that approach is really useful; appreciate it. If I understand correctly, I am supposed to define $g$ to be $fcirc h: A^Cto B^C$ (where $h: Cto A$), and show that if $f(h(c))=f(h(c'))$ then $ c=c'$. But doesn't this mean that the input of $g$ is an element $c in C$, instead of a function $Cto A$?
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:48












              • $begingroup$
                I am also stuck on how to proceed; by the fact that $f$ is one-one, I can prove that $h(c)=h(c')$, but without any info about $h$ (do I have to define it in a specific way?) I can't really prove $c=c'$
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:52






              • 1




                $begingroup$
                @DanielMak:No, you would define $g(h) = fcirc h$ (not $g=fcirc h$ which is nonsense). And the function you need to prove is a bijection is $g$ itself, not the function that $g$ outputs. In other words, for injectivity you need to prove that if $g(h_1)=g(h_2)$ then $h_1=h_2$ -- which is to say, if $fcirc h_1$ and $fcirc h_2$ are the same function, then $h_1$and $h_2$ must have been the same function to begin with.
                $endgroup$
                – Henning Makholm
                Dec 31 '18 at 16:18


















              • $begingroup$
                Thank you that approach is really useful; appreciate it. If I understand correctly, I am supposed to define $g$ to be $fcirc h: A^Cto B^C$ (where $h: Cto A$), and show that if $f(h(c))=f(h(c'))$ then $ c=c'$. But doesn't this mean that the input of $g$ is an element $c in C$, instead of a function $Cto A$?
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:48












              • $begingroup$
                I am also stuck on how to proceed; by the fact that $f$ is one-one, I can prove that $h(c)=h(c')$, but without any info about $h$ (do I have to define it in a specific way?) I can't really prove $c=c'$
                $endgroup$
                – Daniel Mak
                Dec 31 '18 at 15:52






              • 1




                $begingroup$
                @DanielMak:No, you would define $g(h) = fcirc h$ (not $g=fcirc h$ which is nonsense). And the function you need to prove is a bijection is $g$ itself, not the function that $g$ outputs. In other words, for injectivity you need to prove that if $g(h_1)=g(h_2)$ then $h_1=h_2$ -- which is to say, if $fcirc h_1$ and $fcirc h_2$ are the same function, then $h_1$and $h_2$ must have been the same function to begin with.
                $endgroup$
                – Henning Makholm
                Dec 31 '18 at 16:18
















              $begingroup$
              Thank you that approach is really useful; appreciate it. If I understand correctly, I am supposed to define $g$ to be $fcirc h: A^Cto B^C$ (where $h: Cto A$), and show that if $f(h(c))=f(h(c'))$ then $ c=c'$. But doesn't this mean that the input of $g$ is an element $c in C$, instead of a function $Cto A$?
              $endgroup$
              – Daniel Mak
              Dec 31 '18 at 15:48






              $begingroup$
              Thank you that approach is really useful; appreciate it. If I understand correctly, I am supposed to define $g$ to be $fcirc h: A^Cto B^C$ (where $h: Cto A$), and show that if $f(h(c))=f(h(c'))$ then $ c=c'$. But doesn't this mean that the input of $g$ is an element $c in C$, instead of a function $Cto A$?
              $endgroup$
              – Daniel Mak
              Dec 31 '18 at 15:48














              $begingroup$
              I am also stuck on how to proceed; by the fact that $f$ is one-one, I can prove that $h(c)=h(c')$, but without any info about $h$ (do I have to define it in a specific way?) I can't really prove $c=c'$
              $endgroup$
              – Daniel Mak
              Dec 31 '18 at 15:52




              $begingroup$
              I am also stuck on how to proceed; by the fact that $f$ is one-one, I can prove that $h(c)=h(c')$, but without any info about $h$ (do I have to define it in a specific way?) I can't really prove $c=c'$
              $endgroup$
              – Daniel Mak
              Dec 31 '18 at 15:52




              1




              1




              $begingroup$
              @DanielMak:No, you would define $g(h) = fcirc h$ (not $g=fcirc h$ which is nonsense). And the function you need to prove is a bijection is $g$ itself, not the function that $g$ outputs. In other words, for injectivity you need to prove that if $g(h_1)=g(h_2)$ then $h_1=h_2$ -- which is to say, if $fcirc h_1$ and $fcirc h_2$ are the same function, then $h_1$and $h_2$ must have been the same function to begin with.
              $endgroup$
              – Henning Makholm
              Dec 31 '18 at 16:18




              $begingroup$
              @DanielMak:No, you would define $g(h) = fcirc h$ (not $g=fcirc h$ which is nonsense). And the function you need to prove is a bijection is $g$ itself, not the function that $g$ outputs. In other words, for injectivity you need to prove that if $g(h_1)=g(h_2)$ then $h_1=h_2$ -- which is to say, if $fcirc h_1$ and $fcirc h_2$ are the same function, then $h_1$and $h_2$ must have been the same function to begin with.
              $endgroup$
              – Henning Makholm
              Dec 31 '18 at 16:18











              2












              $begingroup$

              Given an element of $A^C,$ it is some map $u:C to A.$ Then define $g(u):C to B$ by composition. That is, $g(u)(c)=f(u(c)).$






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                Given an element of $A^C,$ it is some map $u:C to A.$ Then define $g(u):C to B$ by composition. That is, $g(u)(c)=f(u(c)).$






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  Given an element of $A^C,$ it is some map $u:C to A.$ Then define $g(u):C to B$ by composition. That is, $g(u)(c)=f(u(c)).$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Given an element of $A^C,$ it is some map $u:C to A.$ Then define $g(u):C to B$ by composition. That is, $g(u)(c)=f(u(c)).$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Dec 30 '18 at 23:24









                  coffeemathcoffeemath

                  2,8571415




                  2,8571415























                      2












                      $begingroup$

                      Since A$approx$B, there exists a one-to-one onto function f:A$rightarrow$B. That is the key to the exercise.



                      Let $phiin A^C$. Then f$circ phi$:C$rightarrow$B. So we define a function $psi_f$:$A^C rightarrow B^C$ such that $phi mapsto fcircphi$.



                      1:$psi_f$ is onto. Let g$in B^C$. Then $f^{-1}circ g in A^C$. So
                      $$psi_f(f^{-1} circ g) = f circ f^{-1} circ g = g. checkmark $$



                      2.$psi_f$ is one-to-one. Suppose $phi_1,phi_2 in A^C$ such that $f circ psi_1 = f circ psi_2$. Thus for every c $in$ C, then
                      $$f(psi_1(c)) = f(psi_2(c))$$
                      But since f is invertible, that forces
                      $$psi_1(c) = psi_2(c)text{ } forall c checkmark$$






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$


















                        2












                        $begingroup$

                        Since A$approx$B, there exists a one-to-one onto function f:A$rightarrow$B. That is the key to the exercise.



                        Let $phiin A^C$. Then f$circ phi$:C$rightarrow$B. So we define a function $psi_f$:$A^C rightarrow B^C$ such that $phi mapsto fcircphi$.



                        1:$psi_f$ is onto. Let g$in B^C$. Then $f^{-1}circ g in A^C$. So
                        $$psi_f(f^{-1} circ g) = f circ f^{-1} circ g = g. checkmark $$



                        2.$psi_f$ is one-to-one. Suppose $phi_1,phi_2 in A^C$ such that $f circ psi_1 = f circ psi_2$. Thus for every c $in$ C, then
                        $$f(psi_1(c)) = f(psi_2(c))$$
                        But since f is invertible, that forces
                        $$psi_1(c) = psi_2(c)text{ } forall c checkmark$$






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$
















                          2












                          2








                          2





                          $begingroup$

                          Since A$approx$B, there exists a one-to-one onto function f:A$rightarrow$B. That is the key to the exercise.



                          Let $phiin A^C$. Then f$circ phi$:C$rightarrow$B. So we define a function $psi_f$:$A^C rightarrow B^C$ such that $phi mapsto fcircphi$.



                          1:$psi_f$ is onto. Let g$in B^C$. Then $f^{-1}circ g in A^C$. So
                          $$psi_f(f^{-1} circ g) = f circ f^{-1} circ g = g. checkmark $$



                          2.$psi_f$ is one-to-one. Suppose $phi_1,phi_2 in A^C$ such that $f circ psi_1 = f circ psi_2$. Thus for every c $in$ C, then
                          $$f(psi_1(c)) = f(psi_2(c))$$
                          But since f is invertible, that forces
                          $$psi_1(c) = psi_2(c)text{ } forall c checkmark$$






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          Since A$approx$B, there exists a one-to-one onto function f:A$rightarrow$B. That is the key to the exercise.



                          Let $phiin A^C$. Then f$circ phi$:C$rightarrow$B. So we define a function $psi_f$:$A^C rightarrow B^C$ such that $phi mapsto fcircphi$.



                          1:$psi_f$ is onto. Let g$in B^C$. Then $f^{-1}circ g in A^C$. So
                          $$psi_f(f^{-1} circ g) = f circ f^{-1} circ g = g. checkmark $$



                          2.$psi_f$ is one-to-one. Suppose $phi_1,phi_2 in A^C$ such that $f circ psi_1 = f circ psi_2$. Thus for every c $in$ C, then
                          $$f(psi_1(c)) = f(psi_2(c))$$
                          But since f is invertible, that forces
                          $$psi_1(c) = psi_2(c)text{ } forall c checkmark$$







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Dec 30 '18 at 23:51









                          Joel PereiraJoel Pereira

                          75919




                          75919






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              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.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057266%2ftrouble-proving-that-if-a-approx-b-then-ac-approx-bc%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

                              Quarter-circle Tiles

                              build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

                              Mont Emei