Unions and intersections of collections of sets

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1MileCrash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sets
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding unions and intersections of sets, specifically the collection of sets defined as An = [-n, n]. The user is confused about the notation and the definitions, initially misinterpreting the intersection of the sets as the empty set, while it actually includes the number 0. Clarification is provided that the union of the sets is all real numbers, as every real number falls within at least one interval, while the intersection contains only the number 0. The user also explores another example involving natural numbers, realizing that the union would consist of natural numbers rather than all real numbers. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of notation and practice in grasping set theory concepts.
1MileCrash
Messages
1,338
Reaction score
41
My proof class just took a turn for the worst for me - I don't understand this.

First, the notation is extremely confusing to me, I need help to make sure I'm getting this.

If An is some set for some natural number n such as [-n, n].

Then (script A) the collection is the set of all An? Is that correct?

Just a basis needed..


Now, the definitions of unions and intersections got me super confused. But what I am getting out of it.. is that

U(script A)

Is the set of all x that are in any of the An in the collection, while

(intersection) An is the set of all x that are in every An in the collection?

So, in my example,

U(script A) is the set of all x that are in at least one of the An, which is all real numbers, because all real numbers will fall into one of those intervals.

while

(intersection)(script A) is the set of all x that are in all An, which is the empty set, because no real number will fall into every one of those intervals.



Ugh.. does anyone even know what I'm talking about? This is strange.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1MileCrash said:
My proof class just took a turn for the worst for me - I don't understand this.

First, the notation is extremely confusing to me, I need help to make sure I'm getting this.

If An is some set for some natural number n such as [-n, n].

Then (script A) the collection is the set of all An? Is that correct?

We don't know how you defined \mathcal{A}. But that definition makes sense so I think you are correct.

Just a basis needed..


Now, the definitions of unions and intersections got me super confused. But what I am getting out of it.. is that

U(script A)

Is the set of all x that are in any of the An in the collection, while

(intersection) An is the set of all x that are in every An in the collection?

Correct.

So, in my example,

U(script A) is the set of all x that are in at least one of the An, which is all real numbers, because all real numbers will fall into one of those intervals.

Correct.

while

(intersection)(script A) is the set of all x that are in all An, which is the empty set, because no real number will fall into every one of those intervals.

Not correct. The number 0 will be in every one of those intervals. So \bigcap \mathcal{A}=\{0\}

Ugh.. does anyone even know what I'm talking about? This is strange.

It's weird notation, I know. But you will eventually get used to it. You seem to grasp it alright.
 
Thank you.. I see my error. I think I confused it with this one here:

Consider An = { k >= n }

Where k is a natural number.

Would it be correct to say that the union of the collection is all real numbers, since all k can fall into (at least one) An set?

And that the intersection is the empty set, since no natural number k is greater than or equal to ALL natural numbers n?
 
1MileCrash said:
Thank you.. I see my error. I think I confused it with this one here:

Consider An = { k >= n }

Where k is a natural number.

I don't like that notation. You should write it better. For example

A_n=\{k\in \mathbb{N}~\vert~k\geq n\}

Would it be correct to say that the union of the collection is all real numbers, since all k can fall into (at least one) An set?

But k are natural numbers. So you can't get all the real numbers. The union would be the set of all the natural numbers.

And that the intersection is the empty set, since no natural number k is greater than or equal to ALL natural numbers n?

Correct.
 
Right right... just need to shut up and practice for now!

Thanks a bunch for your help again!
 
Back
Top