- #1

- 18

- 0

[itex]\left|\:A\:\right|\:\leq\:\left|\:A\:\times\:B\:\right|\: if\: B\neq\phi[/itex]

In English,

The cardinality of a set [itex]A[/itex] is less than or equal to the cardinality of Cartesian product of A and a non empty set [itex]B[/itex].

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter sujoykroy
- Start date

- #1

- 18

- 0

[itex]\left|\:A\:\right|\:\leq\:\left|\:A\:\times\:B\:\right|\: if\: B\neq\phi[/itex]

In English,

The cardinality of a set [itex]A[/itex] is less than or equal to the cardinality of Cartesian product of A and a non empty set [itex]B[/itex].

- #2

Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 14,950

- 19

- #3

tiny-tim

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 25,836

- 252

In problems like this, just write out the definition, and then plug the problem into it.

So … what is the definition of "cardinality of P ≤ cardinality of Q"?

oh … and … what is the definition of "non empty set"?

- #4

- 18

- 0

considered?

I think, if you pick up a binary relation [itex]f[/itex] in such way that [itex]f\left(\:a\:\right)\:=\:\left(\:a\:,\:b\:)[/itex] for some [itex]b\:\in\:B[/itex] for all [itex]a\:\in\:A[/itex], then [itex]f[/itex] will be a one-to-one function with [itex]dom\:f\:=\:A[/itex] and [itex]ran\:f\:\subset\:A\:\times\:B[/itex], hence proving that [itex]\left|\:A\:\right|\:\leq\:\left|\:A\:\times\:B\:\right|\: if\: B\neq\phi[/itex], but i am not sure if the approach is right or not.

In problems like this, just write out the definition, and then plug the problem into it.

So … what is the definition of "cardinality of P ≤ cardinality of Q"?

oh … and … what is the definition of "non empty set"?

Below is the definition of cardinality that i am using,

The cardinality of a set [itex]A[/itex] is less than or equal to the cardinality of a set [itex]B[/itex] if there is a one-to-one function [itex]f[/itex] on [itex]A[/itex] into [itex]B[/itex]

- #5

Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 14,950

- 19

Well, try formalizing it. If you wind up with a valid proof, then your approach is right.but i am not sure if the approach is right or not.

- #6

- 18

- 0

Well, try formalizing it. If you wind up with a valid proof, then your approach is right.

Thanks. Actually i was trying to understand/prove the use/existence of Infinite Sequence used in various proof of Cantor-Schroder-Bernstein i.e. if [itex]\left|X\right|\:\leq\:\left|Y\right|[/itex] and [itex]\left|Y\right|\:\leq\:\left|X\right|[/itex] then [itex]\left|X\right|\:=\:\left|Y\right|[/itex] and current problem was a doorway to open up the logical window towards it. So, formalization was not really my problem, i just needed to get confirmation if the logic is correct.

- #7

tiny-tim

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 25,836

- 252

Below is the definition of cardinality that i am using,

"The cardinality of a set A is less than or equal to the cardinality of a set B if there is a one-to-one function f on A into B"

Hi sujoykroy!

Yes, that's the one … so, in this case, you need to define a one-to-one f on A into A x B.

And to do that, answer the question: what is the definition of "non empty set"?

(it may sound a daft question … but sometimes maths is like that! )

- #8

- 1

- 0

What does [tex]\left|A\right|[/tex] = [tex]\left|A \times \aleph\right|[/tex]for any set A, tell you about A?

I hope to use this to find an injective function from [tex]\aleph^{A}[/tex]to [tex]\left\{0,1\right\}^{A}[/tex]

- #9

CRGreathouse

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 2,824

- 0

- #10

Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 14,950

- 19

I think you misread the problem.

- #11

- 1

- 0

Yes, that I did

Share: