Peirce’s 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.10

Posted on May 7, 2014 by

In the case of a dyadic relation F \subseteq X \times Y that has the qualifications of a function f : X \to Y, there are a number of further differentia that arise:

\begin{array}{lll} f ~\text{is surjective} & \iff & f ~\text{is total at}~ Y. \\[6pt] f ~\text{is injective} & \iff & f ~\text{is tubular at}~ Y. \\[6pt] f ~\text{is bijective} & \iff & f ~\text{is}~ 1\text{-regular at}~ Y. \end{array}

For example, the function f : X \to Y depicted below is neither total nor tubular at its codomain Y, so it can enjoy none of the properties of being surjective, injective, or bijective.


LOR 1870 Figure 40		 (40)

An easy way to extract a surjective function from any function is to reset its codomain to its range. For example, the range of the function f above is Y^\prime = \{ 0, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 \}. Thus, if we form a new function g : X \to Y^\prime that looks just like f on the domain X but is assigned the codomain Y^\prime, then g is surjective, and is described as a mapping onto Y^\prime.


LOR 1870 Figure 41		 (41)

The function h : Y^\prime \to Y is injective.


LOR 1870 Figure 42		 (42)

The function m : X \to Y is bijective.


LOR 1870 Figure 43		 (43)
This entry was posted in Graph Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Peirce’s 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.10

  1. Pingback: Survey of Relation Theory • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

w
Cancel

Connecting to %s