equivalence between a set and the subset of its subset


by batballbat
Tags: equivalence, subset
batballbat
batballbat is offline
#1
Nov21-12, 11:52 AM
P: 127
Is it true that: If A is not equivalent to its subset A1. Then A is not equivalent to any subset of A1?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
SensaBubble: It's a bubble, but not as we know it (w/ video)
The hemihelix: Scientists discover a new shape using rubber bands (w/ video)
Microbes provide insights into evolution of human language
Norwegian
Norwegian is offline
#2
Nov22-12, 07:03 AM
P: 144
You should consider also informing us about the relevant equivalence relation, as the truth or falsity of your statement heavily depends on that information.

For example, if you for your eq.rel. use existence of a bijection, the statement is true, but other relations, like having same parity, will render your statement false.
batballbat
batballbat is offline
#3
Nov22-12, 07:41 AM
P: 127
actually this is trivial. I just learnt all this the complicated way, .i.e. proving cantor bernstein without the well ordering theorem.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
a belongs to b, b subset c, a not a subset of c Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
subset vs proper subset? Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 22
Set Theory| Proof if A subset B then f(A) subset f(B) Calculus & Beyond Homework 5
Could someone check this proof?! If c\b subset c\a, then prove a subset b Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
Subset vs Proper Subset Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 10