Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Small Set Theory Proof

  1. #1
    Aug 2008

    Small Set Theory Proof

    Let I be a nonempty set and for each  i\epsilon I let  X_{i} be a set.

    Prove that if each  X_{i} is a subset of a given set S, then  e( \bigcup_{i\epsilon I} X_{i}) = \bigcap_{i\epsilon I} e X_{i}

    Please note that e represents the complement of a set.

    Thank you as always!

    Edit: Also note, of course, that we must show inclusion both ways.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Moo is offline
    A Cute Angle Moo's Avatar
    Mar 2008
    P(I'm here)=1/3, P(I'm there)=t+1/3
    Hello !

    If x \in e \left( \bigcup_{i\in I} X_i \right) we can say that x \not \in \bigcup_{i \in I} X_i.
    This means that \forall i \in I ~,~ x \not \in X_i (by the definition of the union)
    This is equivalent to saying that \forall i \in I~,~ x \in e\left(X_i\right)
    Therefore x \in \bigcap_{i \in I} e \left(X_i\right) (by the definition of the intersection)

    Conclusion : x \in e \left( \bigcup_{i\in I} X_i \right) \Longleftrightarrow x \in \bigcap_{i \in I} e \left(X_i\right)
    Thus e \left( \bigcup_{i\in I} X_i \right) = \bigcap_{i \in I} e \left(X_i\right)

    You have to check it, but I'm quite sure the reasoning works with equivalence and not implication, and hence the conclusion that doesn't go through the steps A \subseteq B and B \subseteq A
    If you want to do the reverse order, it's the same reasoning.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    MHF Contributor Matt Westwood's Avatar
    Jul 2008
    Reading, UK
    More rigorous to prove it by induction, of course.

    This is a standard result and it pays to study it. This is known as (one of) "De Morgan's Laws" - the other being with the union and intersection the other way round. I recommend a google session on it.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Help with set theory proof
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Mar 8th 2011, 11:25 AM
  2. [SOLVED] A small part of a chain rule proof I don't get
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jan 11th 2011, 04:03 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: Oct 19th 2010, 11:50 AM
  4. small change from small changes
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Jun 30th 2009, 09:30 AM
  5. Proof of a small lemma (systems of linear equations)
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sep 6th 2008, 08:38 PM

Search Tags

/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum