Hey guys. I don't understand how to prove this: (a) (b)
Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+
Originally Posted by Foink Hey guys. I don't understand how to prove this: (a) one method: Let ......we assume A is non-empty, it's trivial otherwise or we cannot have , thus, therefore, now assume . this implies (i'm sure there's some kind of axiom or something that allows us to say this). thus since and , we have
Ohhh okay. I guess I was on the right track then. I didn't know you could just say that you could'nt have lol Thanks
Originally Posted by Foink Ohhh okay. I guess I was on the right track then. I didn't know you could just say that you could'nt have lol Thanks well, it's the empty set, by definition it has no elements...or it wouldn't be empty, and the name would just be stupid... try a similar approach for the second
yea the second one was easier because I didn't have to deal with the emptysets lol thanks
What about these two: The damn emptysets
Originally Posted by Foink What about these two: The damn emptysets see where this gets you: by definition: where are sets, and means -compliment
Ahh I see. I got it Thanks!!
View Tag Cloud