| New Reply |
Simple proof question |
Share Thread | Thread Tools |
| Jan30-12, 07:20 PM | #1 |
|
|
Simple proof questionFrom the way its written, case 1 shows that A[itex]\subseteq[/itex]BUA while case 2 shows that B[itex]\subseteq[/itex]BUA; therefore, the conclusion would be AUB[itex]\subseteq[/itex]BUA. Maybe I'm missing something here..? |
| Jan30-12, 09:46 PM | #2 |
|
|
You are right. But if we substitute A and B, then we also get a proof for the other inclusion. That is: a proof for the other inclusion follows from proving the first inclusion.
|
| Jan30-12, 10:03 PM | #3 |
|
|
A→B and B→A therefore A=B was a totally different proof. And some how, he accomplishes the same thing without using this because of something to do with his description of an "arbitrary x". |
| Jan30-12, 10:06 PM | #4 |
|
|
Simple proof questionFirst we prove (as in the OP) that [itex]E\cup F\subseteq F\cup E[/itex] for ALL sets E and F. This is what the OP does, right?? Now, we want to prove that [itex]A\cup B=B\cup A[/itex] for all sets A and B. Well [itex]\subseteq[/itex] follows if we take E=A and F=B. [itex]\supseteq[/itex] follows if we take E=B and F=A. So equality holds. |
| Jan30-12, 10:55 PM | #5 |
|
|
Would you agree that in case 1: he essentially showed that A⊆BUA? Would you also agree that in case 2: he essentially showed that B⊆BUA? He believed that they didn't. Why would he think that? At any rate, I agree with you here; however, he seemed to be making a different argument (during the discussion). |
| Jan30-12, 11:00 PM | #6 |
|
|
Formally, you indeed need to provide justification for both inclusions. However, I wasn't present at the discussion, so I can't really say what your professor was trying to say. All I can say is that I think you have a good understanding of this situation and that what you say is correct. |
| Jan30-12, 11:16 PM | #7 |
|
|
The class is being taught out of the computer science department. I honestly don't think this would have been an issue in the mathematics department. ANyway, thanks for your time. |
| New Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads for: Simple proof question
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| Question about simple analysis proof | Calculus | 3 | ||
| Simple Proof | Precalculus Mathematics Homework | 10 | ||
| Simple prime/GCD proof question... | Linear & Abstract Algebra | 2 | ||
| simple proof | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 1 | ||
| Simple Proof | Calculus & Beyond Homework | 19 | ||