Counterexample for set identity

In summary, the conversation discusses the validity of the statement "if A\cap B = \emptyset , then f[A]\cap f[B] = \emptyset", and the use of a counterexample to disprove it. The speaker suggests using a specific example, such as X = \mathbb{R}, A = {-1, -2, -3}, B = {1, 2, 3}, and f = {(x,y): y = x^2}, to show that the statement is false. The conversation also mentions the use of the symbol \emptyset in LaTeX.
  • #1
WannabeNewton
Science Advisor
5,844
551

Homework Statement


Consider the function [tex]f:X \to Y[/tex]. Suppose that A and B are subsets of X. Decide whether the following statements are necessarily true (I am including just the one I had trouble with):
(a) if [tex]A\cap B = \emptyset [/tex], then [tex]f[A]\cap f = \emptyset [/tex]

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


I know this statement is false and I know I have to use a counter example. The problem is I am not at all good with counter examples. Could I use a discrete situation as a way of disproving the statement? For example, if I let [tex]X = \mathbb{R}[/tex], A = {-1, -2, -3}, B = {1, 2, 3}, and f = {(x,y): y = x^2} then [tex]A\cap B = \emptyset [/tex] but f[A] = f = {1, 4, 9} so [tex]f[a]\cap f\neq \emptyset [/tex]. I don't know if this suffices as a counter example because it is a very specific example so I was hoping you guys could help me come up with one that would be credible?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
There's nothing wrong with a counterexample being specific. That looks fine to me.
 
  • #3
Oh ok. Thank you.
 
  • #4
The LaTeX symbol for the emptyset is simply \emptyset
 
  • #5
micromass said:
The LaTeX symbol for the emptyset is simply \emptyset

Fixed it thanks mate.
 

FAQ: Counterexample for set identity

1. What is a "counterexample" for set identity?

A counterexample for set identity is a specific example that disproves a proposed set identity or equality. It is a set of elements that does not satisfy the given criteria for the proposed identity.

2. How do scientists use counterexamples for set identity?

Scientists use counterexamples for set identity to test and validate proposed set identities. By providing a counterexample, scientists can show that the proposed identity is not always true, helping to refine and improve hypotheses and theories.

3. Can a counterexample for set identity ever prove an identity to be true?

No, a counterexample can only disprove a proposed set identity. If a counterexample is found, it means that the identity is not always true and further investigation is needed.

4. Are counterexamples for set identity used in all fields of science?

Yes, counterexamples are used in all fields of science as a tool for testing and refining hypotheses and theories. They are particularly useful in fields that deal with abstract concepts and complex systems, such as mathematics and physics.

5. Are there any limitations to using counterexamples for set identity?

While counterexamples can be a valuable tool, they are not always conclusive. In some cases, a counterexample may be found due to an error or oversight in the proposed identity, rather than a flaw in the entire theory. It is important for scientists to carefully examine and analyze counterexamples before drawing conclusions.

Similar threads

Back
Top