Empty Set: A Closer Look at \phi= {}

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob3141592
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the empty set, denoted as \phi = {}, and its properties, including its relationship with other sets and its cardinality. Participants explore distinctions between elements and sets, the nature of the empty set, and the implications of power sets.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the empty set is a set that contains nothing, while questioning the notion of an "empty element."
  • One participant states that every set contains the empty set, but another clarifies that it is actually the power set of every set that contains the empty set.
  • A participant distinguishes between the empty set itself and the set that contains the empty set, arguing that they are not the same.
  • There is a discussion about the cardinality of the empty set, with a suggestion that it is simply zero.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the correct statement is that every set contains the empty set as a subset, rather than as an element.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for clarity in definitions, particularly regarding the distinction between the empty set and sets that contain the empty set. There are also unresolved questions about the implications of cardinality and the nature of subsets.

Bob3141592
Messages
236
Reaction score
2
Here's something else about sets I'm trying to get right. The empty set is a set that contains nothing, written as [tex]\phi[/tex] = {}. It's called an empty set, so it is a set. Every set contains the empty set, right? Is there such a notion as an empty element? That doesn't sound right to me.

Normally we distinguish between an element and the set containing that single element, correct? But if the empty set is nothing (or the set that contains nothing) then the set {[tex]\phi[/tex]} = {} = [tex]\phi[/tex]. Is it proper to say that the empty set and it's power sets are the same? What would that make the cardinality of the empty set, simply zero?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bob3141592 said:
Every set contains the empty set, right?

Hi Bob!

No … the power set of every set contains the empty set. :smile:
 
Hey Bob, this confuses me too sometimes here is how I think about it:

{[tex]\phi[/tex]} = {}

This is not right. The RHS is the set that contains the empty set. The LRS is the empty set itself.

The empty set contains nothing. The set the contains the empty set contains something (the empty set)!
 
"Every set contains the empty set" is wrong. The correct statement is "every set contains the empty set as a subset".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
13K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K