On the meaning of set-valued mappings












1












$begingroup$


here one question that may look stupid. Why in general one insists on naming in a different way functions and set-valued functions just because one is single valued and the other is not? I mean, from topology, we define as function an object that maps one topological space $X$ into another one $Y$, we never require this mapping to be single-valued! Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What do you mean? No one makes distinctions between "functions" and "set-valued functions". If your foundations are based on set theory then everything is a set anyway. Are you asking about multivalued functions? By default when mathematicians speak of "functions" they mean "single-valued functions".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:33












  • $begingroup$
    My question is, why in first calculus courses, one is told that a function is single-valued by definition?
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because that's how we define a function in all of mathematics!
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:55










  • $begingroup$
    In particular, in topology. Which multivalued function from topology do you have in mind?
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:15










  • $begingroup$
    That's the point! If this is true (unless I'm missing the point), then any function $f$ from a topological to another has to be single-valued, while there is plenty of function that are not so. For instance, the function $xmapsto [x]$ from a general topological space X onto X/R (where R is a certain equivalence defined over $X$ and $XR$ is the associated quotient space) is in general not single-valued.
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:17
















1












$begingroup$


here one question that may look stupid. Why in general one insists on naming in a different way functions and set-valued functions just because one is single valued and the other is not? I mean, from topology, we define as function an object that maps one topological space $X$ into another one $Y$, we never require this mapping to be single-valued! Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What do you mean? No one makes distinctions between "functions" and "set-valued functions". If your foundations are based on set theory then everything is a set anyway. Are you asking about multivalued functions? By default when mathematicians speak of "functions" they mean "single-valued functions".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:33












  • $begingroup$
    My question is, why in first calculus courses, one is told that a function is single-valued by definition?
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because that's how we define a function in all of mathematics!
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:55










  • $begingroup$
    In particular, in topology. Which multivalued function from topology do you have in mind?
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:15










  • $begingroup$
    That's the point! If this is true (unless I'm missing the point), then any function $f$ from a topological to another has to be single-valued, while there is plenty of function that are not so. For instance, the function $xmapsto [x]$ from a general topological space X onto X/R (where R is a certain equivalence defined over $X$ and $XR$ is the associated quotient space) is in general not single-valued.
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:17














1












1








1


1



$begingroup$


here one question that may look stupid. Why in general one insists on naming in a different way functions and set-valued functions just because one is single valued and the other is not? I mean, from topology, we define as function an object that maps one topological space $X$ into another one $Y$, we never require this mapping to be single-valued! Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




here one question that may look stupid. Why in general one insists on naming in a different way functions and set-valued functions just because one is single valued and the other is not? I mean, from topology, we define as function an object that maps one topological space $X$ into another one $Y$, we never require this mapping to be single-valued! Thanks!







functions






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Feb 27 '16 at 2:28









frankfrank

596




596












  • $begingroup$
    What do you mean? No one makes distinctions between "functions" and "set-valued functions". If your foundations are based on set theory then everything is a set anyway. Are you asking about multivalued functions? By default when mathematicians speak of "functions" they mean "single-valued functions".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:33












  • $begingroup$
    My question is, why in first calculus courses, one is told that a function is single-valued by definition?
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because that's how we define a function in all of mathematics!
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:55










  • $begingroup$
    In particular, in topology. Which multivalued function from topology do you have in mind?
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:15










  • $begingroup$
    That's the point! If this is true (unless I'm missing the point), then any function $f$ from a topological to another has to be single-valued, while there is plenty of function that are not so. For instance, the function $xmapsto [x]$ from a general topological space X onto X/R (where R is a certain equivalence defined over $X$ and $XR$ is the associated quotient space) is in general not single-valued.
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:17


















  • $begingroup$
    What do you mean? No one makes distinctions between "functions" and "set-valued functions". If your foundations are based on set theory then everything is a set anyway. Are you asking about multivalued functions? By default when mathematicians speak of "functions" they mean "single-valued functions".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:33












  • $begingroup$
    My question is, why in first calculus courses, one is told that a function is single-valued by definition?
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because that's how we define a function in all of mathematics!
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 2:55










  • $begingroup$
    In particular, in topology. Which multivalued function from topology do you have in mind?
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:15










  • $begingroup$
    That's the point! If this is true (unless I'm missing the point), then any function $f$ from a topological to another has to be single-valued, while there is plenty of function that are not so. For instance, the function $xmapsto [x]$ from a general topological space X onto X/R (where R is a certain equivalence defined over $X$ and $XR$ is the associated quotient space) is in general not single-valued.
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Feb 27 '16 at 3:17
















$begingroup$
What do you mean? No one makes distinctions between "functions" and "set-valued functions". If your foundations are based on set theory then everything is a set anyway. Are you asking about multivalued functions? By default when mathematicians speak of "functions" they mean "single-valued functions".
$endgroup$
– Alex Provost
Feb 27 '16 at 2:33






$begingroup$
What do you mean? No one makes distinctions between "functions" and "set-valued functions". If your foundations are based on set theory then everything is a set anyway. Are you asking about multivalued functions? By default when mathematicians speak of "functions" they mean "single-valued functions".
$endgroup$
– Alex Provost
Feb 27 '16 at 2:33














$begingroup$
My question is, why in first calculus courses, one is told that a function is single-valued by definition?
$endgroup$
– frank
Feb 27 '16 at 2:39




$begingroup$
My question is, why in first calculus courses, one is told that a function is single-valued by definition?
$endgroup$
– frank
Feb 27 '16 at 2:39




1




1




$begingroup$
Because that's how we define a function in all of mathematics!
$endgroup$
– Alex Provost
Feb 27 '16 at 2:55




$begingroup$
Because that's how we define a function in all of mathematics!
$endgroup$
– Alex Provost
Feb 27 '16 at 2:55












$begingroup$
In particular, in topology. Which multivalued function from topology do you have in mind?
$endgroup$
– Alex Provost
Feb 27 '16 at 3:15




$begingroup$
In particular, in topology. Which multivalued function from topology do you have in mind?
$endgroup$
– Alex Provost
Feb 27 '16 at 3:15












$begingroup$
That's the point! If this is true (unless I'm missing the point), then any function $f$ from a topological to another has to be single-valued, while there is plenty of function that are not so. For instance, the function $xmapsto [x]$ from a general topological space X onto X/R (where R is a certain equivalence defined over $X$ and $XR$ is the associated quotient space) is in general not single-valued.
$endgroup$
– frank
Feb 27 '16 at 3:17




$begingroup$
That's the point! If this is true (unless I'm missing the point), then any function $f$ from a topological to another has to be single-valued, while there is plenty of function that are not so. For instance, the function $xmapsto [x]$ from a general topological space X onto X/R (where R is a certain equivalence defined over $X$ and $XR$ is the associated quotient space) is in general not single-valued.
$endgroup$
– frank
Feb 27 '16 at 3:17










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

I believe we have lifted some of your confusion in the comments, but let me illustrate how being "set-valued" and being "multivalued" have nothing in common. Let $A = {1}$ be a one-point set and let $B = {1,A,{A}}$. We are going to define four relations from $A$ to $B$. By definition these are subsets of the three-element set $A times B$, and $a in A$ is related to $b in B$ if $(a,b)$ belongs to the relation.



Let $R_1 = {(1,1)}$. This is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ has the unique output $1$. Moreover it isn't really "set-valued" if we consider $1$ to be an object that is somehow not really a set because we haven't specified what it contains.



Let $R_2 = {(1,A)}$. Again this is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ yields the output $A$ (a set). This is a "set-valued function".



Let $R_3 = {(1,1),(1,A)}$. This is a multivalued function because the input $1$ has precisely two outputs, namely $1$ and $A$. It isn't precisely set-valued because you don't consider $1$ to be a set.



Let $R_4 = {(1,A),(1,{A})}$. This is a "set-valued" multifunction.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Still it's not clear...to me set-valued and multi-valued functions are the same object. Thank you for replying.
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:19










  • $begingroup$
    @frank I don't understand your concern. E.g. $R_2$ defines a standard (single-valued) function which is "set-valued".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:22










  • $begingroup$
    Exactly the point is that I'm not getting why one couldn't call valued functions simply functions. It's just a matter of giving the name to things :)
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:29










  • $begingroup$
    @frank Well, generally single-valued functions are much more common and more useful than multi-valued functions in most fields of mathematics, hence the convention to call the former simply "functions".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Mar 4 '16 at 3:27












  • $begingroup$
    A function is one-to-one or many-to-one. A set-valued function is simply a function whose values are sets. A multifunction is multi-valued. Therefore it is not a function. "Multifunction" is a misnomer. A multifunction is no function, it is a special kind of relations.
    $endgroup$
    – IV_
    Apr 22 '17 at 22:44



















0












$begingroup$

Your question, as it stands, is confusing, but from your discussion with others in the comment sections, I think the problem is that you are yet to understand what the word function means in modern mathematics. In particular, I think you are imposing additional constraints on the usual definition, namely that you think a function must be one-to-one. But this is not necessary at all. Many functions are not injective (that's synonymous to one-to-one), and an example is the one you plucked from topology in your discussion in the comment under the OP.



So a function need not map different points to different images. There is absolutely no need for that in general. All that we require is that the same point must have no less and no more than one image.



In the language of sets, a function takes each point in a set (called the domain) to exactly one image point in a set (called the codomain). This does not mean two points in the domain cannot have the same image (we make no such restriction), so long as they both have just that one point as image.



I hope this clarifies some things. But I think you should read more about functions and really understand them. A definition means just what it says, no more or less.



PS. I thought I should give an example. Note that what we call a constant function is any function that takes all the points in the domain to the same one point in the codomain. This is a function because every point of the domain has precisely one image, even though in this case they all have the same image.






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%2f1673914%2fon-the-meaning-of-set-valued-mappings%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    I believe we have lifted some of your confusion in the comments, but let me illustrate how being "set-valued" and being "multivalued" have nothing in common. Let $A = {1}$ be a one-point set and let $B = {1,A,{A}}$. We are going to define four relations from $A$ to $B$. By definition these are subsets of the three-element set $A times B$, and $a in A$ is related to $b in B$ if $(a,b)$ belongs to the relation.



    Let $R_1 = {(1,1)}$. This is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ has the unique output $1$. Moreover it isn't really "set-valued" if we consider $1$ to be an object that is somehow not really a set because we haven't specified what it contains.



    Let $R_2 = {(1,A)}$. Again this is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ yields the output $A$ (a set). This is a "set-valued function".



    Let $R_3 = {(1,1),(1,A)}$. This is a multivalued function because the input $1$ has precisely two outputs, namely $1$ and $A$. It isn't precisely set-valued because you don't consider $1$ to be a set.



    Let $R_4 = {(1,A),(1,{A})}$. This is a "set-valued" multifunction.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Still it's not clear...to me set-valued and multi-valued functions are the same object. Thank you for replying.
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:19










    • $begingroup$
      @frank I don't understand your concern. E.g. $R_2$ defines a standard (single-valued) function which is "set-valued".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:22










    • $begingroup$
      Exactly the point is that I'm not getting why one couldn't call valued functions simply functions. It's just a matter of giving the name to things :)
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:29










    • $begingroup$
      @frank Well, generally single-valued functions are much more common and more useful than multi-valued functions in most fields of mathematics, hence the convention to call the former simply "functions".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 3:27












    • $begingroup$
      A function is one-to-one or many-to-one. A set-valued function is simply a function whose values are sets. A multifunction is multi-valued. Therefore it is not a function. "Multifunction" is a misnomer. A multifunction is no function, it is a special kind of relations.
      $endgroup$
      – IV_
      Apr 22 '17 at 22:44
















    0












    $begingroup$

    I believe we have lifted some of your confusion in the comments, but let me illustrate how being "set-valued" and being "multivalued" have nothing in common. Let $A = {1}$ be a one-point set and let $B = {1,A,{A}}$. We are going to define four relations from $A$ to $B$. By definition these are subsets of the three-element set $A times B$, and $a in A$ is related to $b in B$ if $(a,b)$ belongs to the relation.



    Let $R_1 = {(1,1)}$. This is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ has the unique output $1$. Moreover it isn't really "set-valued" if we consider $1$ to be an object that is somehow not really a set because we haven't specified what it contains.



    Let $R_2 = {(1,A)}$. Again this is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ yields the output $A$ (a set). This is a "set-valued function".



    Let $R_3 = {(1,1),(1,A)}$. This is a multivalued function because the input $1$ has precisely two outputs, namely $1$ and $A$. It isn't precisely set-valued because you don't consider $1$ to be a set.



    Let $R_4 = {(1,A),(1,{A})}$. This is a "set-valued" multifunction.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Still it's not clear...to me set-valued and multi-valued functions are the same object. Thank you for replying.
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:19










    • $begingroup$
      @frank I don't understand your concern. E.g. $R_2$ defines a standard (single-valued) function which is "set-valued".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:22










    • $begingroup$
      Exactly the point is that I'm not getting why one couldn't call valued functions simply functions. It's just a matter of giving the name to things :)
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:29










    • $begingroup$
      @frank Well, generally single-valued functions are much more common and more useful than multi-valued functions in most fields of mathematics, hence the convention to call the former simply "functions".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 3:27












    • $begingroup$
      A function is one-to-one or many-to-one. A set-valued function is simply a function whose values are sets. A multifunction is multi-valued. Therefore it is not a function. "Multifunction" is a misnomer. A multifunction is no function, it is a special kind of relations.
      $endgroup$
      – IV_
      Apr 22 '17 at 22:44














    0












    0








    0





    $begingroup$

    I believe we have lifted some of your confusion in the comments, but let me illustrate how being "set-valued" and being "multivalued" have nothing in common. Let $A = {1}$ be a one-point set and let $B = {1,A,{A}}$. We are going to define four relations from $A$ to $B$. By definition these are subsets of the three-element set $A times B$, and $a in A$ is related to $b in B$ if $(a,b)$ belongs to the relation.



    Let $R_1 = {(1,1)}$. This is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ has the unique output $1$. Moreover it isn't really "set-valued" if we consider $1$ to be an object that is somehow not really a set because we haven't specified what it contains.



    Let $R_2 = {(1,A)}$. Again this is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ yields the output $A$ (a set). This is a "set-valued function".



    Let $R_3 = {(1,1),(1,A)}$. This is a multivalued function because the input $1$ has precisely two outputs, namely $1$ and $A$. It isn't precisely set-valued because you don't consider $1$ to be a set.



    Let $R_4 = {(1,A),(1,{A})}$. This is a "set-valued" multifunction.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    I believe we have lifted some of your confusion in the comments, but let me illustrate how being "set-valued" and being "multivalued" have nothing in common. Let $A = {1}$ be a one-point set and let $B = {1,A,{A}}$. We are going to define four relations from $A$ to $B$. By definition these are subsets of the three-element set $A times B$, and $a in A$ is related to $b in B$ if $(a,b)$ belongs to the relation.



    Let $R_1 = {(1,1)}$. This is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ has the unique output $1$. Moreover it isn't really "set-valued" if we consider $1$ to be an object that is somehow not really a set because we haven't specified what it contains.



    Let $R_2 = {(1,A)}$. Again this is just an ordinary function: the input $1$ yields the output $A$ (a set). This is a "set-valued function".



    Let $R_3 = {(1,1),(1,A)}$. This is a multivalued function because the input $1$ has precisely two outputs, namely $1$ and $A$. It isn't precisely set-valued because you don't consider $1$ to be a set.



    Let $R_4 = {(1,A),(1,{A})}$. This is a "set-valued" multifunction.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Feb 27 '16 at 4:57









    Alex ProvostAlex Provost

    15.5k22350




    15.5k22350












    • $begingroup$
      Still it's not clear...to me set-valued and multi-valued functions are the same object. Thank you for replying.
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:19










    • $begingroup$
      @frank I don't understand your concern. E.g. $R_2$ defines a standard (single-valued) function which is "set-valued".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:22










    • $begingroup$
      Exactly the point is that I'm not getting why one couldn't call valued functions simply functions. It's just a matter of giving the name to things :)
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:29










    • $begingroup$
      @frank Well, generally single-valued functions are much more common and more useful than multi-valued functions in most fields of mathematics, hence the convention to call the former simply "functions".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 3:27












    • $begingroup$
      A function is one-to-one or many-to-one. A set-valued function is simply a function whose values are sets. A multifunction is multi-valued. Therefore it is not a function. "Multifunction" is a misnomer. A multifunction is no function, it is a special kind of relations.
      $endgroup$
      – IV_
      Apr 22 '17 at 22:44


















    • $begingroup$
      Still it's not clear...to me set-valued and multi-valued functions are the same object. Thank you for replying.
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:19










    • $begingroup$
      @frank I don't understand your concern. E.g. $R_2$ defines a standard (single-valued) function which is "set-valued".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:22










    • $begingroup$
      Exactly the point is that I'm not getting why one couldn't call valued functions simply functions. It's just a matter of giving the name to things :)
      $endgroup$
      – frank
      Mar 4 '16 at 2:29










    • $begingroup$
      @frank Well, generally single-valued functions are much more common and more useful than multi-valued functions in most fields of mathematics, hence the convention to call the former simply "functions".
      $endgroup$
      – Alex Provost
      Mar 4 '16 at 3:27












    • $begingroup$
      A function is one-to-one or many-to-one. A set-valued function is simply a function whose values are sets. A multifunction is multi-valued. Therefore it is not a function. "Multifunction" is a misnomer. A multifunction is no function, it is a special kind of relations.
      $endgroup$
      – IV_
      Apr 22 '17 at 22:44
















    $begingroup$
    Still it's not clear...to me set-valued and multi-valued functions are the same object. Thank you for replying.
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:19




    $begingroup$
    Still it's not clear...to me set-valued and multi-valued functions are the same object. Thank you for replying.
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:19












    $begingroup$
    @frank I don't understand your concern. E.g. $R_2$ defines a standard (single-valued) function which is "set-valued".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:22




    $begingroup$
    @frank I don't understand your concern. E.g. $R_2$ defines a standard (single-valued) function which is "set-valued".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:22












    $begingroup$
    Exactly the point is that I'm not getting why one couldn't call valued functions simply functions. It's just a matter of giving the name to things :)
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:29




    $begingroup$
    Exactly the point is that I'm not getting why one couldn't call valued functions simply functions. It's just a matter of giving the name to things :)
    $endgroup$
    – frank
    Mar 4 '16 at 2:29












    $begingroup$
    @frank Well, generally single-valued functions are much more common and more useful than multi-valued functions in most fields of mathematics, hence the convention to call the former simply "functions".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Mar 4 '16 at 3:27






    $begingroup$
    @frank Well, generally single-valued functions are much more common and more useful than multi-valued functions in most fields of mathematics, hence the convention to call the former simply "functions".
    $endgroup$
    – Alex Provost
    Mar 4 '16 at 3:27














    $begingroup$
    A function is one-to-one or many-to-one. A set-valued function is simply a function whose values are sets. A multifunction is multi-valued. Therefore it is not a function. "Multifunction" is a misnomer. A multifunction is no function, it is a special kind of relations.
    $endgroup$
    – IV_
    Apr 22 '17 at 22:44




    $begingroup$
    A function is one-to-one or many-to-one. A set-valued function is simply a function whose values are sets. A multifunction is multi-valued. Therefore it is not a function. "Multifunction" is a misnomer. A multifunction is no function, it is a special kind of relations.
    $endgroup$
    – IV_
    Apr 22 '17 at 22:44











    0












    $begingroup$

    Your question, as it stands, is confusing, but from your discussion with others in the comment sections, I think the problem is that you are yet to understand what the word function means in modern mathematics. In particular, I think you are imposing additional constraints on the usual definition, namely that you think a function must be one-to-one. But this is not necessary at all. Many functions are not injective (that's synonymous to one-to-one), and an example is the one you plucked from topology in your discussion in the comment under the OP.



    So a function need not map different points to different images. There is absolutely no need for that in general. All that we require is that the same point must have no less and no more than one image.



    In the language of sets, a function takes each point in a set (called the domain) to exactly one image point in a set (called the codomain). This does not mean two points in the domain cannot have the same image (we make no such restriction), so long as they both have just that one point as image.



    I hope this clarifies some things. But I think you should read more about functions and really understand them. A definition means just what it says, no more or less.



    PS. I thought I should give an example. Note that what we call a constant function is any function that takes all the points in the domain to the same one point in the codomain. This is a function because every point of the domain has precisely one image, even though in this case they all have the same image.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      Your question, as it stands, is confusing, but from your discussion with others in the comment sections, I think the problem is that you are yet to understand what the word function means in modern mathematics. In particular, I think you are imposing additional constraints on the usual definition, namely that you think a function must be one-to-one. But this is not necessary at all. Many functions are not injective (that's synonymous to one-to-one), and an example is the one you plucked from topology in your discussion in the comment under the OP.



      So a function need not map different points to different images. There is absolutely no need for that in general. All that we require is that the same point must have no less and no more than one image.



      In the language of sets, a function takes each point in a set (called the domain) to exactly one image point in a set (called the codomain). This does not mean two points in the domain cannot have the same image (we make no such restriction), so long as they both have just that one point as image.



      I hope this clarifies some things. But I think you should read more about functions and really understand them. A definition means just what it says, no more or less.



      PS. I thought I should give an example. Note that what we call a constant function is any function that takes all the points in the domain to the same one point in the codomain. This is a function because every point of the domain has precisely one image, even though in this case they all have the same image.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        Your question, as it stands, is confusing, but from your discussion with others in the comment sections, I think the problem is that you are yet to understand what the word function means in modern mathematics. In particular, I think you are imposing additional constraints on the usual definition, namely that you think a function must be one-to-one. But this is not necessary at all. Many functions are not injective (that's synonymous to one-to-one), and an example is the one you plucked from topology in your discussion in the comment under the OP.



        So a function need not map different points to different images. There is absolutely no need for that in general. All that we require is that the same point must have no less and no more than one image.



        In the language of sets, a function takes each point in a set (called the domain) to exactly one image point in a set (called the codomain). This does not mean two points in the domain cannot have the same image (we make no such restriction), so long as they both have just that one point as image.



        I hope this clarifies some things. But I think you should read more about functions and really understand them. A definition means just what it says, no more or less.



        PS. I thought I should give an example. Note that what we call a constant function is any function that takes all the points in the domain to the same one point in the codomain. This is a function because every point of the domain has precisely one image, even though in this case they all have the same image.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Your question, as it stands, is confusing, but from your discussion with others in the comment sections, I think the problem is that you are yet to understand what the word function means in modern mathematics. In particular, I think you are imposing additional constraints on the usual definition, namely that you think a function must be one-to-one. But this is not necessary at all. Many functions are not injective (that's synonymous to one-to-one), and an example is the one you plucked from topology in your discussion in the comment under the OP.



        So a function need not map different points to different images. There is absolutely no need for that in general. All that we require is that the same point must have no less and no more than one image.



        In the language of sets, a function takes each point in a set (called the domain) to exactly one image point in a set (called the codomain). This does not mean two points in the domain cannot have the same image (we make no such restriction), so long as they both have just that one point as image.



        I hope this clarifies some things. But I think you should read more about functions and really understand them. A definition means just what it says, no more or less.



        PS. I thought I should give an example. Note that what we call a constant function is any function that takes all the points in the domain to the same one point in the codomain. This is a function because every point of the domain has precisely one image, even though in this case they all have the same image.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Jun 25 '18 at 12:57

























        answered Jun 25 '18 at 12:48









        AllawonderAllawonder

        1,970616




        1,970616






























            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%2f1673914%2fon-the-meaning-of-set-valued-mappings%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

            Bundesstraße 106

            Verónica Boquete

            Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten