Disproving the Statement: A Contradiction in Set Theory | Proof Help

INdeWATERS
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
I am having issues with a proof, as follows.
*U = universal set , P(U) = power set of a universal set

For all sets A, B, C ∈ P(U), if A ⊆ C and B ⊆ C, then A ⊆ B or B ⊆ A.

I am pretty sure the statement is false and so I have to disprove it, i.e. prove the negation. I am stuck on how to negate. My attempts are as follows...

(1) There exist sets A, B, C ∈ P(U) such that A ⊆ C or B ⊆ C and A ⊄ B and B ⊄ A.
(2) There exist sets A, B, C ∈ P(U) such that if A ⊆ C or B ⊆ C then A ⊄ B and B ⊄ A.

Would the contrapositive of the statement be easier to work with??
For all sets A, B, C ∈ P(U), if A ⊆ B or B ⊆ A then, A ⊆ C and B ⊆ C.

Thank you for your time and help!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Take a pair of sets that are not empty and not overlapping and call them A and B. Let C = A∪B. Then obviously both A and B are contained in C, but neither contains the other.
 
It is really easy to disprove that with an example:

If you have a set as follows, A={a,b,c}, then the power set will be the next,

P(A)={empty,A,{a,b},{b,c},{a,c}}, then if you define B=A, C={b,c}, and D={a,c}, then C\subsetB and D\subsetB but C is not a subset of D, neither D is a subset of C.
q.e.d.

With that example the proff is done
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...

Similar threads

Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Back
Top