da javicemarpe » 22/02/2017, 19:49
These inequalities should be strict. And, in fact, they are equivalences. I'll explain you the increasing case. The another one is analogous.
A function $f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ is strictly increasing if for all $x<y$ you have that $f(x)<f(y)$. A strictly increasing function must be invertible because of the injectivity.
Let $f$ be an increasing function. Then, if $x\in\mathbb{R}$ and $y\in \text{Im}(f)$, then you have that there exists $x'\in\mathbb{R}$ such that $f(x')=y$. If you had $f(x)<y$ then you would have $f(x)<f(x')$ and, as $f$ is strictly increasing, you must have $x<x'$.
Indeed, we know that $x'\ne x$ because of the fact that $f$ is STRICTLY increasing. So we have that $x'<x$ or $x<x'$. But if we had $x'<x$, then we would have $f(x')<f(x)$, which is impossible because we know that $f(x)<f(x')$. Then, the only possibility for $x'$ is to satisfy the inequality $x<x'$, i.e., $x<f^{-1}(y)$.
If you repeat the argument with $f^{-1}$ in place of $f$ then (I think) you'll get the converse.