Can we say N is strictly a subset of P(N)?

  • Thread starter AATroop
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the inclusion of \mathbb{N} in the power set of \mathbb{N}. The set theoretic definition of \mathbb{N} is given, and it is shown that \mathbb{N} is indeed a subset of \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N}). However, the inclusion is strict as there are elements in \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N}) that are not in \mathbb{N}.
  • #1
AATroop
31
2
Essentially, do we know [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex][itex]\subset[/itex][itex]{P}\mathbb{(N)}[/itex]?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
A lot depends on your definition of [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex]. But if we take the usual set theoretic definition, then the inclusion is indeed true.

What is the set theoretic definition of [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex]? It goes as follows:

  • Define [itex]0=\emptyset[/itex]
  • If [itex]0,...,n[/itex] are defined, then define [itex]n+1=\{0,...,n\}[/itex]
  • Define [itex]\mathbb{N}=\{0,1,2,...\}[/itex]

Now we can check that [itex]\mathbb{N}\subseteq \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N})[/itex]. First of all, [itex]\emptyset[/itex] is a subset of [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex] and thus [itex]\emptyset\in \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N})[/itex]. Furthermore, [itex]\{0,...,n\}[/itex] is a subset of [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex], and thus [itex]n+1=\{0,...,n\}\in \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N})[/itex].
This shows that [itex]\mathbb{N}\subseteq \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N})[/itex]. The inclusion is strict since [itex]\{2\}[/itex] is a subset of [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex], but not an element.
 

1. What is a subset?

A subset is a set that contains elements that are all also elements of another set. In other words, every element in the subset is also present in the larger set.

2. What does it mean for N to be strictly a subset of P(N)?

It means that every element in N is also an element of P(N), and there are elements in P(N) that are not in N. In other words, N is a proper subset of P(N).

3. Can N and P(N) have the same elements and still have N be a strict subset of P(N)?

Yes, N and P(N) can have the same elements, but they must be in different orders. For example, if N = {1, 2} and P(N) = {{1}, {2}, {1, 2}}, then N is a strict subset of P(N) because N is missing the element {1, 2} which is present in P(N).

4. How can we prove that N is strictly a subset of P(N)?

We can prove that N is strictly a subset of P(N) by showing that every element in N is also present in P(N), and that there is at least one element in P(N) that is not in N. This can be done by listing out the elements of N and P(N) and comparing them, or by using set operations such as subset and superset symbols.

5. Is it possible for N to be a subset of P(N) but not a strict subset?

No, it is not possible for N to be a subset of P(N) without being a strict subset. This is because P(N) always contains at least one more element than N, making N a proper subset of P(N).

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
678
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
958
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
721
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top