Cardinality of Cartesian Product

In summary: But my solution works for the general case too.In summary, the conversation discusses the theory of cardinality for a Cartesian product, specifically that the cardinality of a set A is less than or equal to the cardinality of the Cartesian product of A and a non-empty set B. The conversation also explores different methods and approaches to proving this theory, such as defining a one-to-one function and using the Axiom of Choice. Additionally, the concept of non-empty sets is discussed in order to understand the definition of cardinality. The conversation also touches on related topics such as the Cantor-Schroder-Bernstein theorem and the use of the Axiom of Choice to find an injective function.
  • #1
sujoykroy
18
0
Can you prove the following theory of cardinality for a Cartesian product, -
[itex]\left|\:A\:\right|\:\leq\:\left|\:A\:\times\:B\:\right|\: if\: B\neq\phi[/itex]

In English,
The cardinality of a set [itex]A[/itex] is less than or equal to the cardinality of Cartesian product of A and a non empty set [itex]B[/itex].
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
What have you tried? What methods can you use? What ways of restating the problem have you considered?
 
  • #3
Hi sujoykroy! :smile:

In problems like this, just write out the definition, and then plug the problem into it.

So … what is the definition of "cardinality of P ≤ cardinality of Q"? :smile:

oh … and … what is the definition of "non empty set"? :biggrin:
 
  • #4
Hurkyl said:
What have you tried? What methods can you use? What ways of restating the problem have you

considered?

I think, if you pick up a binary relation [itex]f[/itex] in such way that [itex]f\left(\:a\:\right)\:=\:\left(\:a\:,\:b\:)[/itex] for some [itex]b\:\in\:B[/itex] for all [itex]a\:\in\:A[/itex], then [itex]f[/itex] will be a one-to-one function with [itex]dom\:f\:=\:A[/itex] and [itex]ran\:f\:\subset\:A\:\times\:B[/itex], hence proving that [itex]\left|\:A\:\right|\:\leq\:\left|\:A\:\times\:B\:\right|\: if\: B\neq\phi[/itex], but i am not sure if the approach is right or not.

tiny-tim said:
Hi sujoykroy! :smile:

In problems like this, just write out the definition, and then plug the problem into it.

So … what is the definition of "cardinality of P ≤ cardinality of Q"? :smile:

oh … and … what is the definition of "non empty set"? :biggrin:

Below is the definition of cardinality that i am using,
The cardinality of a set [itex]A[/itex] is less than or equal to the cardinality of a set [itex]B[/itex] if there is a one-to-one function [itex]f[/itex] on [itex]A[/itex] into [itex]B[/itex]
 
  • #5
sujoykroy said:
but i am not sure if the approach is right or not.
Well, try formalizing it. If you wind up with a valid proof, then your approach is right. :smile:
 
  • #6
Hurkyl said:
Well, try formalizing it. If you wind up with a valid proof, then your approach is right. :smile:

Thanks. Actually i was trying to understand/prove the use/existence of Infinite Sequence used in various proof of Cantor-Schroder-Bernstein i.e. if [itex]\left|X\right|\:\leq\:\left|Y\right|[/itex] and [itex]\left|Y\right|\:\leq\:\left|X\right|[/itex] then [itex]\left|X\right|\:=\:\left|Y\right|[/itex] and current problem was a doorway to open up the logical window towards it. So, formalization was not really my problem, i just needed to get confirmation if the logic is correct.
 
  • #7
sujoykroy said:
Below is the definition of cardinality that i am using,

"The cardinality of a set A is less than or equal to the cardinality of a set B if there is a one-to-one function f on A into B"

Hi sujoykroy! :smile:

Yes, that's the one … so, in this case, you need to define a one-to-one f on A into A x B.

And to do that, answer the question: what is the definition of "non empty set"?

(it may sound a daft question … but sometimes maths is like that! :smile:)
 
  • #8
I also have a quick query regarding something related to cardinality of a cartesian product.

What does [tex]\left|A\right|[/tex] = [tex]\left|A \times \aleph\right|[/tex]for any set A, tell you about A?

I hope to use this to find an injective function from [tex]\aleph^{A}[/tex]to [tex]\left\{0,1\right\}^{A}[/tex]
 
  • #9
You need the Axiom of Choice, as far as I can tell. But once you apply the Axiom, it's pretty simple, assuming your definition of A <= B is that there is an injection from A to B (a bijection from A to a subset of B).
 
  • #10
I think you misread the problem.
 
  • #11
Yes, that I did
 

Related to Cardinality of Cartesian Product

What is the definition of "Cardinality of Cartesian Product"?

The cardinality of a Cartesian product is the total number of elements in the set created by taking the cross product of two sets. It represents the size or number of ordered pairs that can be formed from the two sets.

How is the cardinality of a Cartesian product calculated?

The cardinality of a Cartesian product is calculated by multiplying the cardinalities of the two sets being crossed. For example, if set A has 3 elements and set B has 4 elements, the cardinality of A x B would be 3 x 4 = 12.

What is the relationship between the cardinality of a Cartesian product and the cardinality of the individual sets?

The cardinality of a Cartesian product is always equal to the product of the cardinalities of the individual sets. This means that if set A has m elements and set B has n elements, the cardinality of A x B will always be m x n.

Can the cardinality of a Cartesian product be infinite?

Yes, the cardinality of a Cartesian product can be infinite if one or both of the sets being crossed have infinite cardinalities. For example, the cardinality of R x R (the Cartesian product of the set of real numbers with itself) is infinite.

What is the cardinality of the Cartesian product of two null sets?

The cardinality of the Cartesian product of two null sets is 0. This is because there are no elements in either set to form ordered pairs with, resulting in an empty set with a cardinality of 0.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top