Discrete mathematics, bijections between disjoint unions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of bijections in discrete mathematics, specifically focusing on the relationship between disjoint unions and intersections of sets. Participants are trying to understand a proof involving the equivalence of certain set expressions and the implications of bijections.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants are attempting to show that ##(A \cup B)\sqcup(A \cap B) \leftrightarrow A \sqcup B##, referencing specific bijections and set partitions.
  • Participants mention that ##A \leftrightarrow (A \backslash B) \sqcup (A \cup B)## and ##A \cup B \leftrightarrow (A \backslash B) \sqcup B## are foundational to the proof, but express confusion about how these relationships lead to the conclusion.
  • There is a question about the meaning of the symbol "##\sqcup##", with some clarifying that it represents the disjoint union of sets.
  • Another participant queries the meaning of "##\leftrightarrow##", with responses indicating it denotes the existence of a bijection rather than simple equality.
  • Some participants express frustration over the perceived lack of understanding or engagement from others regarding the topic, suggesting it is part of standard discrete mathematics coursework.
  • One participant challenges the application of the disjoint union definition to a specific example, indicating a lack of clarity in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the clarity of the proof or the application of the definitions involved. Multiple viewpoints exist regarding the interpretation of the symbols and the steps in the proof, leading to ongoing confusion and debate.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the validity of the steps in the proof and the definitions of the symbols used, indicating potential limitations in their understanding of the material.

infk
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Hi,
So I am trying to show the following:
##(A \cup B)\sqcup(A \cap B) \leftrightarrow A \sqcup B##

The proof that I am trying to understand starts with:
##A \leftrightarrow (A \backslash B) \sqcup (A\cup B) \qquad (1)##,
and
##A \cup B \leftrightarrow (A\backslash B)\sqcup B \qquad (2)##

These two both make sense, in the first one we see that ##(A \backslash B) ## with ## (A\cup B)## is a partition of A, and thus there are bijections from ##(A \backslash B) ## to ## \{ (x,0) : x \in (A \backslash B) \}## and from ##A \cap B## to ##\{ (y,1) : y \in A \cap B \}##, and the same argument for ##(2)##

The next step in the proof says that:
##(A \cup B)\sqcup(A \cap B) \leftrightarrow (A\backslash B)\sqcup B \sqcup (A \cap B) ## which (apparently) follows from ##(2)##
and then, ##(1)## apparently means that
##(A\backslash B)\sqcup B \sqcup (A \cap B) \leftrightarrow A \sqcup B## which proves it.
But I don't understand how ##(1)## and ##(2)## helps us in these steps, can you just exchange terms like that? Anyone care to explain? Thanks..
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
infk said:
Hi,
So I am trying to show the following:
##(A \cup B)\sqcup(A \cap B) \leftrightarrow A \sqcup B##

The proof that I am trying to understand starts with:
##A \leftrightarrow (A \backslash B) \sqcup (A\cup B) \qquad (1)##,
and
##A \cup B \leftrightarrow (A\backslash B)\sqcup B \qquad (2)##

These two both make sense, in the first one we see that ##(A \backslash B) ## with ## (A\cup B)## is a partition of A, and thus there are bijections from ##(A \backslash B) ## to ## \{ (x,0) : x \in (A \backslash B) \}## and from ##A \cap B## to ##\{ (y,1) : y \in A \cap B \}##, and the same argument for ##(2)##

The next step in the proof says that:
##(A \cup B)\sqcup(A \cap B) \leftrightarrow (A\backslash B)\sqcup B \sqcup (A \cap B) ## which (apparently) follows from ##(2)##
and then, ##(1)## apparently means that
##(A\backslash B)\sqcup B \sqcup (A \cap B) \leftrightarrow A \sqcup B## which proves it.
But I don't understand how ##(1)## and ##(2)## helps us in these steps, can you just exchange terms like that? Anyone care to explain? Thanks..

What the"##\sqcup##" stand for??
 
stauros said:
What the"##\sqcup##" stand for??

##A \sqcup B## is the disjoint union of ##A## and ##B##, defined by:
##A \sqcup B = \{(x,0):x \in A \} \cup \{(y,1):y \in B \}##
 
And ##\leftrightarrow## ? Does that simlpy mean equality (=) here?
 
Erland said:
And ##\leftrightarrow## ? Does that simlpy mean equality (=) here?
I thought this was standard notation in (discrete) mathematics, but anyway,
##A \leftrightarrow B## means that there exists a bijection between ##A## and ##B##.
 
So there is not a single person on the board who knows about this? It is from a first course in discrete mathematics for 2nd year students.
 
infk said:
##A \sqcup B## is the disjoint union of ##A## and ##B##, defined by:
##A \sqcup B = \{(x,0):x \in A \} \cup \{(y,1):y \in B \}##

I can't get your example to work when using this definition. I don't get it at all.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K