Is (a,a) a Better Notation for Representing an Empty Set Than [a,a]?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter StephenPrivitera
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convention
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The notation [a,a] is recognized as a legitimate representation of the singleton set {a}, while (a,a) is interpreted as denoting the empty set. The discussion highlights that [a,a] is typically used in contexts involving intervals, such as [a,b], where b may equal a. The interpretation of (a,a) as the empty set raises questions about its utility, particularly in mathematical expressions involving functions like A={x : f(x)<0 on [a,x]} and A={x : f(x)<0 on (a,x)}. Ultimately, the choice of notation reflects the author's intent to illustrate the distinction between these representations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of set notation and interval representation
  • Familiarity with mathematical functions and inequalities
  • Knowledge of the concept of empty sets in set theory
  • Basic comprehension of closed and open intervals
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of using closed intervals in set theory
  • Explore the properties of empty sets and their notation
  • Learn about the differences between closed and open intervals in mathematical contexts
  • Investigate the use of function notation in defining sets
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, educators, students studying set theory, and anyone interested in the nuances of mathematical notation and its implications.

StephenPrivitera
Messages
360
Reaction score
0
Is the closed interval [a,a] considered a legitimate notation for the set {a}? Would (a,a) denote the empty set?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[a,a] is used- usually in something like [a,b] where you want to consider the possibility that b= a.

If I came across reference to an interval like (a,a), I probably would interpret it as the empty set- although I would wonder why they picked a!
 
A={x : f(x)<0 on [a,x]}
Is a in A? It is if f(x)<0 on [a,a]. And since [a,a] has only one number, it suffices to show that f(a)<0.

A={x : f(x)<0 on (a,x)}
Is a in A? It is if f(x)<0 on (a,a). But this is kind of nonsense. There is nothing in (a,a). You make the call.

So anyway, I just wanted to point this out to show why you might write (a,a) rather than {}.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K