The empty set has a cardinality of 0, yet it is found in all sets and as we know any sets within a set are counted as a(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); singleelement. But it never counted as an element in the cardinality of a set?

For example: The set {1,2,3} contains 8 distinct subsets including the empty set, as taken by the formula and method of deriving a sets power set.

We know the empty set to be a member of all sets, a proper subset of all except itself. Any set within a set is counted as its element.

So why is the empty set not contained within the cardinality? I know that the empty set has no elements, but the definition of an element of a set means even the empty set is an element.

Maybe I am confused again

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Empty set confusion..

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - Empty confusion | Date |
---|---|

B Confused by this: What does 10^10^79 mean? | Dec 1, 2017 |

I Relation of the empty set to vacuous truth? | Sep 7, 2017 |

I Why is the empty set a proper subset of every set? | Sep 16, 2016 |

Question about empty sets in set theory | Mar 17, 2015 |

Union and Intersection of Empty Collection | Jul 23, 2014 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**