Can you prove the distributive laws?

  • Thread starter Thread starter phillyolly
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Laws
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof of the distributive laws in the context of set theory and logic. The original poster is reviewing basic material and seeks a proof for these laws, indicating a focus on foundational concepts rather than specific homework assignments.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the need to prove the distributive laws both forwards and backwards, referencing concepts from equivalence relations. There is a suggestion to substitute appropriate premises and conclusions in the proof process. One participant expresses a lack of experience in Real Analysis and requests a step-by-step solution to aid their understanding.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance by suggesting foundational topics to study, such as boolean logic and set theory. There is an ongoing exploration of the proof process, with one participant expressing gratitude for the assistance provided, indicating a productive exchange of ideas.

Contextual Notes

The original poster mentions having zero experience in Real Analysis, which may affect their understanding of the discussions and proofs being presented. There is an emphasis on learning rather than completing specific homework tasks.

phillyolly
Messages
157
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



This is not a HW, I am reviewing the basic material for my own use.

Please prove the distributive laws.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 

Attachments

  • pic.jpg
    pic.jpg
    6.5 KB · Views: 418
Physics news on Phys.org
Read my post about proving equivalence relations on your other thread "Proof (Real Analysis I)." The same concept of needing to prove it forwards and backwards applies here. Simply substitute in the appropriate premises and conclusions.
 
Raskolnikov said:
Read my post about proving equivalence relations on your other thread "Proof (Real Analysis I)." The same concept of needing to prove it forwards and backwards applies here. Simply substitute in the appropriate premises and conclusions.

Hi,
Thank you for the posts. I read you previous post on equivalence. I am a person with zero experience in Real Analysis. What you wrote made little sense to me. If you can do either of these problems, it will jump start my process of learning. Can I ask you to solve either problem step-by-step?
Again, these are not my HW questions.
 
If you have zero experience, then I would recommend teaching yourself or taking a quick course on boolean logic and point-element set theory first. I'll go into (almost excess) detail below to help you out here, but you should be able to get this.

Part (a):

[tex]( \Rightarrow )[/tex]
Let [tex]x \in ( A \cap (B \cup C) ).[/tex]
Then [tex](x \in A) \wedge (x \in B \vee x \in C).[/tex]
Thus, by the distributive law, [tex](x \in A \wedge x \in B) \vee (x \in A \wedge x \in C).[/tex]
Hence, [tex]x \in (A \cap B) \vee x \in (A \cap C).[/tex]
Therefore, [tex]x \in ((A \cap B) \cup (A \cap C)).[/tex]

Note: we are just halfway through the proof. We have proved the statement in the forward direction. Now we need to prove it backwards, i.e., [tex]x \in ((A \cap B) \cup (A \cap C)) \rightarrow x \in ( A \cap (B \cup C) ).[/tex]
 
This was so extremely helpful. I am very thankful to you, Raskolnikov.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K