 #1
 317
 25
Main Question or Discussion Point
So apparently the proof involves a trick that converts the problem of a general power set ##\mathscr{P}(M)## of some set ##M## which has of course the property of not having pairwise disjoint setelements to a problem that involves disjoint setelements. I do not understand why this trick is valid because I think by doing so, we are then "reproving" the case where the setelements are disjoint.
Attachments

95.3 KB Views: 284

21.6 KB Views: 391
Last edited: