Check my proof for cartesian product (set theory)

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 2K views
iamsmooth
Messages
103
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that [tex]\forall[/tex] sets [tex]A, B, C[/tex], if [tex]B\subseteq C,[/tex] then [tex]A \times B \subseteq A \times C[/tex]

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


Haven't done set theory proofs in a while. Does this suffice in proving the statement?:

Let [tex]x \in B[/tex] be arbitrary. Assuming [tex]B \subseteq C[/tex] is true, we know that [tex]x \in C[/tex]. Since [tex]x \in B[/tex], we know that [tex]A \times B[/tex] will produce an ordered pair (a,x) where a is an arbitrary element of A. Since [tex]x \in C[/tex], we know that [tex]A \times C[/tex] will produce the same ordered pair (a,x).

Therefore by definition of subsets, [tex]A \times B \subseteq A \times C[/tex]

QEDThanks for your help.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi iamsmooth! :smile:
iamsmooth said:
Prove that [tex]\forall[/tex] sets [tex]A, B, C[/tex], if [tex]B\subseteq C, then A \times B \subseteq A \times C[/tex]

Let [tex]x \in B[/tex] be arbitrary. Assuming [tex]B \subseteq C[/tex] is true, we know that [tex]x \in C[/tex]. Since [tex]x \in B[/tex], we know that [tex]A \times B[/tex] will produce an ordered pair (a,x) where a is an arbitrary element of A. Since [tex]x \in C[/tex], we know that [tex]A \times C[/tex] will produce the same ordered pair (a,x).

Therefore by definition of subsets, [tex]A \times B \subseteq A \times C[/tex]

mmm … messy …

and what does "[tex]A \times B[/tex] will produce an ordered pair (a,x) …" mean?

Instead, start "for any element (a,b) of A x B … " :wink:
 
Let [tex]x \in B[/tex] be arbitrary. Assuming [tex]B \subseteq C[/tex] is true, we know that [tex]x \in C[/tex].

We know that for all elements [tex](a, x) \in A \times B[/tex] where a is an arbitrary element of A, there will also exist [tex](a, x) \in A \times C[/tex] since [tex]x \in A[/tex] and [tex]x \in C[/tex].

Therefore by definition of subsets, [tex]A \times B \subseteq A \times C[/tex]

QED

Is this better?
 
Since you later say "for all elements [tex](a, x) \in A \times B[/tex]", why are you starting with "Let [tex]x \in B[/tex] be arbitrary." ?

The proposition you are required to prove starts "for any element (a,x) of A x B",

so your proof should start with the same words. :wink:
 
Assuming [tex]B \subseteq C[/tex] is true, we know that if there is any element [tex]x \in B[/tex], then [tex]x \in C[/tex].

For any element [tex](a, b) \in A \times B[/tex] where a is an arbitrary element of A and b is an arbitrary element of B, there will also exist [tex](a, b) \in A \times C[/tex] since [tex]b \in B[/tex] and [tex]b \in C[/tex] must be true (by assumption).

Therefore by definition of subsets, [tex]A \times B \subseteq A \times C[/tex]

QED

Is it just my wording that's messed up?
 
You really don't need that opening sentence;

also, "there will also exist" is rather a strange way of putting it, since it's the same element, (a,b), in both sets …

you want something more like any element of A x B is of the form (a,b) with a in A and b in B, and since B is a subset of C, b is in C, and so (a,b) is in A x C. :wink: