Results 1 to 3 of 3

Math Help - A u b = ∅ <--> a=b=∅

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    19

    A u b = ∅ <--> a=b=∅

    I think I'm on the right track, it seems like such an easy proof but oh well!

    Anyway here's what I got so far.

    Suppose A=B=∅

    = ∅

    = ∅ U ∅

    = A U B

    (I think that's a proof, atleast I think that's how my professor did it)

    Suppose A U B = ∅

    Case 1: x is in A

    x is in A, x is not in B

    Therefore A U B <--> ∅

    [(for all x in (A U B), x is in ∅) And (for all x in ∅, x is in (A U B)]

    Since x is in a, in order for A U B = ∅

    A = ∅

    Case 2: x is in b

    etc.


    Im really confused, that doesnt seem to prove anything, I think I'm doing something wrong, any help?
    Last edited by mr fantastic; February 7th 2009 at 03:34 PM. Reason: Deleted bad language.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    is up to his old tricks again! Jhevon's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    From
    New York, USA
    Posts
    11,663
    Thanks
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by glover_m View Post
    I think I'm on the right track, it seems like such an easy proof but oh well!

    Anyway here's what I got so far.

    Suppose A=B=∅

    = ∅

    = ∅ U ∅

    = A U B

    (I think that's a proof, atleast I think that's how my professor did it)
    ok, this direction seems ok

    Suppose A U B = ∅

    Case 1: x is in A

    x is in A, x is not in B

    Therefore A U B <--> ∅

    [(for all x in (A U B), x is in ∅) And (for all x in ∅, x is in (A U B)]

    Since x is in a, in order for A U B = ∅

    A = ∅

    Case 2: x is in b

    etc.
    i don't like this proof, it doesn't seem valid. it all starts from the red line. how does that follow from anything you've said. the line directly below that makes no sense either. it's just a faulty proof.

    for the second direction, use the contrapositive. assume either A or B is not empty, then show that this means AUB is not empty either, pretty easy
    Last edited by ThePerfectHacker; February 7th 2009 at 08:53 PM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    15,713
    Thanks
    1472
    Quote Originally Posted by glover_m View Post
    I think I'm on the right track, it seems like such an easy proof but oh well!

    Anyway here's what I got so far.

    Suppose A=B=∅
    I can only see a square on my internet reader. Is that supposed to be \phi, for the empty set?

    = ∅

    = ∅ U ∅

    = A U B

    (I think that's a proof, atleast I think that's how my professor did it)[/quote]
    Yes, that's good: if A and B are both empty then their union is empty.
    You might also do it as a "proof by contradiction": Suppose x is in A U B. Then x is in A or x is in B. But both A and B are empty either way we have a contradiction.

    Suppose A U B = ∅

    Case 1: x is in A

    x is in A, x is not in B
    No. That's not necessarily true.

    Therefore A U B <--> ∅
    and this certainly doesn't follow! It doesn't even make sense.
    You can, of course, immediately say "If x is in A then x is in A U B". What follows from that?

    [(for all x in (A U B), x is in ∅) And (for all x in ∅, x is in (A U B)]

    Since x is in a, in order for A U B = ∅

    A = ∅

    Case 2: x is in b

    etc.


    Im really confused, that doesnt seem to prove anything, I think I'm doing something wrong, any help?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 6th 2009, 08:30 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum