Proving Equality of Sets - A Quick Question

  • Thread starter jgens
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Sets
In summary, when proving equalities like A \cup (B \cup C) = (A \cup B) \cup C, it is sufficient to note that both sets consist of all elements x such that x \in A, x \in B or x \in C. It is also valid to prove that each set is a subset of the other, but it may become more difficult for more complex problems. The key is to notice that this is just the 'set-theoretic translation' of the corresponding fact from logic, and the preferred proof method is to use logical equivalences.
  • #1
jgens
Gold Member
1,593
50
I just have a very quick (and simple) question: When trying to prove equalities like [itex]A \cup (B \cup C) = (A \cup B) \cup C[/itex], is it sufficient to note that both sets consist of all elements [itex]x[/itex] such that [itex]x \in A[/itex], [itex]x \in B[/itex] or [itex]x \in C[/itex]? Or do I need to go through proving that each set is a subset of the other and consequently deduce that the two sets are equal?

I already know that the second procedure works and although the first one seems make intuitive sense, I'm concerned that it isn't considered sufficient or formal. I would appreciate any feedback. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I would definitely go about it the second way; ie. show that each set is a subset of the other.
 
  • #3
Yes. I would first assume that x is an element of the left hand side and do a prove by cases, then do the same assuming x is an element of the right hand side.
 
  • #4
Alright, that's what I've been doing. Thanks for the feedback.
 
  • #5
Since two sets are equal if and only if they have the same members, the first method is equally valid. But when you consider more difficult problems, it's going to be much more difficult to explicitly write down a set of conditions on x that are satisfied if and only if x is a member of the set on the left (or the set on the right).
 
  • #6
The key here is to notice that this is just the 'set-theoretic translation' of the corresponding (obvious) fact from logic:
[tex]P\vee(Q\vee R)\equiv(P\vee Q)\vee R[/tex].

So my preferred proof would be:

[tex]x\in A\ \cup \ (B\ \cup \ C)\Leftrightarrow (x\in A)\ \vee \ (x\in B\ \vee \ x\in C)\Leftrightarrow(x\in A\ \cup \ B)\ \vee \ (x\in C)\Leftrightarrow x\in (A\ \cup \ B)\ \cup \ C[/tex].
 

FAQ: Proving Equality of Sets - A Quick Question

What is the definition of "equality of sets"?

Equality of sets means that two sets have exactly the same elements. This means that all the elements in set A are also in set B, and vice versa.

How can we prove equality of sets?

One way to prove equality of sets is by using the method of direct proof. This involves showing that all elements in set A are also in set B, and vice versa. Another method is by using the subset method, where we show that set A is a subset of set B and vice versa.

Can we use mathematical operations to prove equality of sets?

Yes, we can use mathematical operations such as union, intersection, and complement to prove equality of sets. These operations help us compare the elements in different sets and determine if they are equal.

What is an example of proving equality of sets?

For example, if we have two sets A = {1, 2, 3} and B = {3, 1, 2}, we can prove their equality by showing that all the elements in set A are also in set B, and vice versa. This would prove that A and B are equal sets.

Why is proving equality of sets important in mathematics?

Proving equality of sets is important because it allows us to compare and analyze different sets. It also helps us determine if two sets have the same properties and can be used interchangeably in mathematical equations and problems.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Back
Top