How Can We Prove Equipotence for Non-Empty Sets?

  • Thread starter jetoso
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Sets
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of equipotence and its properties. It states that two sets are equipotent if there exists a bijection between them. The properties discussed include: (i) a set is equipotent with itself, (ii) if one set is equipotent with another, then the second set is also equipotent with the first, and (iii) if two sets are equipotent and a third set is equipotent with one of them, then the third set is also equipotent with the other set. Formal proofs are provided for each property using the concepts of identity function and inverse function.
  • #1
jetoso
73
0
Hello,
I am trying to prove the following about equipotence:
Let A and B be nonempty sets. We say that A is equipotent with B if there is a bijection between A and B. Then the following hold:
(i) A is equipotent with itself.
(ii) If A is equipotent with B, then B is equipotent with A.
(iii) If A is equipotent with B, and B is equipotent with C, then A is equipotent with C.

Proof:
(i) We can use the identity function Id_A which gives a bijection between A and itself. Shall I need a more formal proof here?

(ii) Let f: A -> B be a 1-1 and onto map. We can use the inverse function f^-1 which will give a bijection between B and A. Same question here, how to give formal proof.

(iii) Let f:A->B, g:B->C be 1-1 and onto. Then the composition h=(g o f) will give a 1-1 and onto map from A onto C. How do you give a formal proof of this?


Hope you guys have some suggestions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
i. define the trivial function f(A)=A
ii. if f(a)=b then f-1(b)=a
iii. if f(a)=b g(b)=c then f.g(a)=c
 
  • #3
Thanks
 
  • #4
I do'nt see what you consider to be 'not formal' about the first two. A function is bijective if and only if it is invertible. Thus (i) and (ii) are trivialities - the identity is invertible, and the inverse of an invertible function is invertible.

The third is again simple - if f and g are invertible then so is fg, and to prove so you just write down the inverse and explain why it satisfies the definition of 'inverse'.
 

FAQ: How Can We Prove Equipotence for Non-Empty Sets?

What is equipotence?

Equipotence is a mathematical concept that refers to the one-to-one correspondence between elements of two sets. This means that there is a relationship between the elements of the two sets where each element in one set is paired with exactly one element in the other set.

How do you prove equipotence between two sets?

To prove equipotence between two sets, you must establish a one-to-one correspondence between the elements of the two sets. This can be done by creating a function that maps each element of one set to a unique element in the other set. If such a function exists, the sets are considered equipotent.

Can equipotence exist between non-empty sets?

Yes, equipotence can exist between non-empty sets. As long as there is a one-to-one correspondence between the elements of the two sets, regardless of their size, they are considered equipotent.

Is equipotence a transitive property?

No, equipotence is not a transitive property. This means that if set A is equipotent to set B, and set B is equipotent to set C, it does not necessarily mean that set A is equipotent to set C.

How does equipotence relate to cardinality?

Equipotence is directly related to cardinality, which is a measure of the size of a set. If two sets are equipotent, they have the same cardinality. This means that they have the same number of elements, regardless of their type or order.

Similar threads

Back
Top