Can sets contain coordinates of points and be used in Cartesian product?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether a set can contain coordinates of points and the validity of performing Cartesian products with such sets. Participants explore the notation and representation of points and their Cartesian products, considering both theoretical and practical implications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question if a set can contain coordinates of points, providing examples like A={[1,3];[4,5];[4,7]}.
  • There is discussion on the notation for Cartesian products, with examples provided for clarity, such as A×B={[1,3][7,8];[1,3][4,2];[4,5][7,8];[4,5][4,2]}.
  • Some participants suggest various ways to represent points, including using different types of brackets and separators, indicating that consistency is key.
  • A participant proposes that using round parentheses and commas is more common for tuples, suggesting A={(1,3),(4,5)} and B={(7,8),(4,2)} as a preferred notation.
  • One participant introduces a formal definition of the Cartesian product, discussing its implications in set theory and providing examples involving functions and vector spaces.
  • Another participant notes that the Cartesian product addresses a universal mapping problem, emphasizing its theoretical significance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate notation and representation of points in sets and Cartesian products. There is no consensus on a single correct approach, and the discussion remains open to various interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential ambiguity in notation and the dependence on definitions of sets and Cartesian products, which may vary across different mathematical contexts.

control
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,
I would like to ask if a set can contain coordinates of points, for example A={[1,3];[4,5];[4,7]} and if we can do Cartesian product of such sets, for example A={[1,3];[4,5]}, B={[7,8];[4,2]} A×B={[1,3][7,8];[1,3][4,2];[4,5][7,8];[4,5][4,2]} (is it correct to write it like that?). I am familiar with doing that when we have sets of numbers (A={1;2}, B={7;5} A×B={[1,7];[1,5];[2,7];[2,5]}). but I am not sure if it is correct with coordinates of points.
Mod note: Fixed typo "carthesian"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
control said:
Hi guys,
I would like to ask if a set can contain coordinates of points, for example A={[1,3];[4,5];[4,7]} and if we can do carthesian product of such sets, for example A={[1,3];[4,5]}, B={[7,8];[4,2]} A×B={[1,3][7,8];[1,3][4,2];[4,5][7,8];[4,5][4,2]} (is it correct to write it like that?).
You can write the elements whichever you want, e.g. ##[1,3][7,8]## or ##[1,3;7,8]## or ##[1,3,7,8]## or ##\begin{bmatrix}1&3\\7&8\end{bmatrix}##. It is certainly useful not to mix them like ##[1,7][3,8]##, because this would probably be harder to read, but as long as you're consistent, there is no rule.
I am familiar with doing that when we have sets of numbers (A={1;2}, B={7;5} A×B={[1,7];[1,5];[2,7];[2,5]}). but I am not sure if it is correct with coordinates of points.
I would probably write ##A=\{(1,3),(4,5)\}\; , \;B=\{(7,8),(4,2)\}## as round parenthesis are more common for tuples and commas as separators in a list, and then ##A \times B = \{\; ((1,3),(7,8))\, , \, ((1,3),(4,2))\; , \;((4,5),(4,2))\, , \,((4,5),(4,2))\;\} ## but only in set theory. With different applications, this might change.
 
Thanks for answer.
 
Perhaps the definition of the Cartesian product would be of some use. Let ##\Gamma## be be an arbitrary nonvoid set, and a set ##A_\gamma## is putted in correspondence to each element ##\gamma\in\Gamma##. Then by definition a set ##\Pi_{\gamma\in \Gamma}A_\gamma## consists of functions ##f:\Gamma\to \bigcup_{\gamma\in \Gamma}A_{\gamma}## such that ##f(\gamma)\in A_\gamma##.
For example a set ##\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{N}## consists of functions ##f:\{1,2\}\to \mathbb{R}\cup\mathbb{N}## (it looks little bit strange, obviously ##\mathbb{R}\cup\mathbb{N}=\mathbb{R}##) such that ##f(1)=a_1\in\mathbb{R},\quad f(2)=a_2\in\mathbb{N}##. This function is also presented as ##(a_1,a_2)##.
Another example: a set ##\mathbb{R}^\mathbb{N}## consists of all functions ##f:\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{R}## those functions can be presented as infinite sequences ##(a_1,a_2,\ldots),\quad f(i)=a_i\in\mathbb{R}##.
If all the ##A_\gamma## are vector spaces over the same field then ##\Pi_{\gamma\in \Gamma}A_\gamma## is also a vector space. By the Choice axiom the set ##\Pi_{\gamma\in \Gamma}A_\gamma## is not empty as long as all the sets ##A_\gamma## are not empty
 
Last edited:
zwierz said:
By the Choice axiom the set ##\Pi_{\gamma\in \Gamma}A_\gamma## is not empty as long as all the sets ##A_\gamma## are not empty
You forgot to mention that the Cartesian product solves a universal mapping problem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K