A set and subset. Can anyone explain what the difference?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the distinction between "subset" and "member" in set theory. It explains that while A can be a member of B and B a member of C, this does not imply that A is a subset of C. The example provided illustrates that A = {3}, B = {{3}, 5}, and C = {B, 17} shows A is not contained in C despite the relationships between A, B, and C. The conversation emphasizes the importance of using precise terminology to avoid confusion in set relationships. Understanding these concepts is crucial for correctly interpreting set membership and subset relationships.
ovoleg
Messages
93
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If A is a subs4et of B and B is a subset of C, then A is a subset of C. But if A = {3}, B={{3},5}, and C = {B, 17}, then A is contained in B and B is contained in C, but A is not contained in C. The set C has exactly two members, and it is easy to see that neither of these members is a set of A


Homework Equations


Why? if B = {{3}, 5} then shouldn't C be = {{3}, 5, 17} ??


The Attempt at a Solution



I don't see how A is not contained in C

Can someone clarify?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well..i think A is a subset of C...donno.why r u saying its not true.
 
electron said:
well..i think A is a subset of C...donno.why r u saying its not true.

A IS a subset of C. That is not what I am stating,

I am saying A is not contained in C.

Hold on let me try to find the LaTeX symbol thingie...
 
ovoleg said:

Homework Statement


If A is a subset of B and B is a subset of C, then A is a subset of C. But if A = {3}, B={{3},5}, and C = {B, 17}, then A is contained in B and B is contained in C, but A is not contained in C. The set C has exactly two members, and it is easy to see that neither of these members is a set of A
Okay, in the second case, A is a member of B, not a subset. Also, in that case, B is a member of C, not a subset.


Homework Equations


Why? if B = {{3}, 5} then shouldn't C be = {{3}, 5, 17} ??
Well, this is an example. C can be anything that demonstrates the point! In the given example, B is a member of C, not a subset. They you want it, C= {{3},5,17}, B is a subset of C, not a member. Of course, even if B is a subset of C, since A is not a subset of B, it would not follow that A must be a subset of C, so either way makes the point.

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't see how A is not contained in C

Can someone clarify?

Thanks!
What do YOU mean by "contained in"? Subset or member? "A member of" and "a subset of" are completely different concepts. You should use one of those and not "contained in" which is ambiguous. In the example as given, C= {B, 17}, B is a member of C while A is neither a member of C nor a subset of it. In your example, C= {{3},5,17}, B is a subset of C and A is a member of C but not a subset of C.

Notice, by the way, that in the "theorem" you state: "If A is a subset of B and B is a subset of C, then A is a subset of C" if either of the hypotheses is not true (A is not a subset of B or B is not a subset of C) then the conclusion "A is a subset of C" is not necessarily true. But it still might happen to be true! A really strange example would be with A= {3}, B= {{3},5}, C= {{3},5, 3}. The A is a member of B, not a subset. B is a subset of C and A is both a member of C (because of the {3} in C) and a subset (because of the 3 in C).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
REVISED:

If A \subseteq B and B \subseteq C, then A \subseteq C. But if A = {3}, B={{3},5}, and C = {B, 17}, then A \in B and B \in C, but A NOT \in C. The set C has exactly two members, and it is easy to see that neither of these members is a set of A
 
HallsofIvy said:
What do YOU mean by "contained in"? Subset or member? "A member of" and "a subset of" are completely different concepts. You should use one of those and not "contained in" which is ambiguous. In the example as given, C= {B, 17}, B is a member of C while A is neither a member of C nor a subset of it. In your example, C= {{3},5,17}, B is a subset of C and A is a member of C but not a subset of C.

Notice, by the way, that in the "theorem" you state: "If A is a subset of B and B is a subset of C, then A is a subset of C" if either of the hypotheses is not true (A is not a subset of B or B is not a subset of C) then the conclusion "A is a subset of C" is not necessarily true. But it still might happen to be true! A really strange example would be with A= {3}, B= {{3},5}, C= {{3},5, 3}. The A is a member of B, not a subset. B is a subset of C and A is both a member of C (because of the {3} in C) and a subset (because of the 3 in C).

I see what you are saying, but let me see if I can understand this logic.

If B is a subset of C then all members of B are also members of C. If all members that are in A are contained in B then wouldn't that imply that all the members in A are part of C. So saying A \in C is not correct because? You would then have to have C= {A, 17} for A \in C to be correct?? So the set has to be a member? for that notation to be correct?
 
I picked up this problem from the Schaum's series book titled "College Mathematics" by Ayres/Schmidt. It is a solved problem in the book. But what surprised me was that the solution to this problem was given in one line without any explanation. I could, therefore, not understand how the given one-line solution was reached. The one-line solution in the book says: The equation is ##x \cos{\omega} +y \sin{\omega} - 5 = 0##, ##\omega## being the parameter. From my side, the only thing I could...
Back
Top