Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Sometimes, the inverse of a function cannot be expressed by a closed-form formula. For example, if f is the function = , then f is a bijection, and therefore possesses an inverse function f −1. The formula for this inverse has an expression as an infinite sum:
For functions of a single variable, the theorem states that if is a continuously differentiable function with nonzero derivative at the point ; then is injective (or bijective onto the image) in a neighborhood of , the inverse is continuously differentiable near = (), and the derivative of the inverse function at is the reciprocal of the derivative of at : ′ = ′ = ′ (()).
An involution is a function f : X → X that, when applied twice, brings one back to the starting point. In mathematics, an involution, involutory function, or self-inverse function [1] is a function f that is its own inverse, f(f(x)) = x. for all x in the domain of f. [2] Equivalently, applying f twice produces the original value.
In calculus, the inverse function rule is a formula that expresses the derivative of the inverse of a bijective and differentiable function f in terms of the derivative of f. More precisely, if the inverse of f {\displaystyle f} is denoted as f − 1 {\displaystyle f^{-1}} , where f − 1 ( y ) = x {\displaystyle f^{-1}(y)=x} if and only if f ...
Actually, the machinery from analytic function theory enters only in a formal way in this proof, in that what is really needed is some property of the formal residue, and a more direct formal proof is available. In fact, the Lagrange inversion theorem has a number of additional rather different proofs, including ones using tree-counting ...
The reciprocal function, the function f(x) that maps x to 1/x, is one of the simplest examples of a function which is its own inverse (an involution). Multiplying by a number is the same as dividing by its reciprocal and vice versa. For example, multiplication by 4/5 (or 0.8) will give the same result as division by 5/4 (or 1.25).
His second proof was geometric. If () = and () =, the theorem can be written: + =.The figure on the right is a proof without words of this formula. Laisant does not discuss the hypotheses necessary to make this proof rigorous, but this can be proved if is just assumed to be strictly monotone (but not necessarily continuous, let alone differentiable).
A proof by contrapositive is a direct proof of the contrapositive of a statement. [14] However, indirect methods such as proof by contradiction can also be used with contraposition, as, for example, in the proof of the irrationality of the square root of 2 .