Cardinality of Cartesian Product

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the cardinality of Cartesian products, specifically exploring the claim that the cardinality of a set A is less than or equal to the cardinality of the Cartesian product of A and a non-empty set B. Participants are examining definitions, methods of proof, and related concepts in set theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that if a binary relation is defined such that it maps elements of A to pairs in A x B, it could demonstrate the cardinality relationship, but expresses uncertainty about the correctness of this approach.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of formalizing the proof to validate the approach taken.
  • A participant mentions the relevance of the Axiom of Choice in establishing relationships between sets and cardinalities, particularly in the context of injections and bijections.
  • There is a query about the implications of the equality \left|A\right| = \left|A \times \aleph\right| for any set A, indicating interest in finding an injective function related to this equality.
  • Several participants discuss the definitions of cardinality and non-empty sets, suggesting that clarity in these definitions is crucial for the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of confidence in their approaches and understanding, with some agreeing on the need for formal definitions and proofs, while others raise questions about the interpretations and implications of the cardinality concepts discussed. No consensus is reached on the correctness of specific approaches or interpretations.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of cardinality and the nature of the sets involved, as well as the application of the Axiom of Choice in the context of the discussion.

sujoykroy
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Can you prove the following theory of cardinality for a Cartesian product, -
\left|\:A\:\right|\:\leq\:\left|\:A\:\times\:B\:\right|\: if\: B\neq\phi

In English,
The cardinality of a set A is less than or equal to the cardinality of Cartesian product of A and a non empty set B.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What have you tried? What methods can you use? What ways of restating the problem have you considered?
 
Hi sujoykroy! :smile:

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"? :smile:

oh … and … what is the definition of "non empty set"? :biggrin:
 
Hurkyl said:
What have you tried? What methods can you use? What ways of restating the problem have you

considered?

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

tiny-tim said:
Hi sujoykroy! :smile:

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"? :smile:

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

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

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 \left|X\right|\:\leq\:\left|Y\right| and \left|Y\right|\:\leq\:\left|X\right| then \left|X\right|\:=\:\left|Y\right| 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.
 
sujoykroy said:
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! :smile:

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! :smile:)
 
I also have a quick query regarding something related to cardinality of a cartesian product.

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

I hope to use this to find an injective function from \aleph^{A}to \left\{0,1\right\}^{A}
 
You need the Axiom of Choice, as far as I can tell. But once you apply the Axiom, it's pretty simple, assuming your definition of A <= B is that there is an injection from A to B (a bijection from A to a subset of B).
 
  • #10
I think you misread the problem.
 
  • #11
Yes, that I did
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K