Home work with set builder notation

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on converting the set (2, 5, 10, 17) into set builder notation, highlighting the challenge of finding a useful condition for such a small set. Participants note that the differences between terms suggest a pattern involving the addition of odd numbers. Several proposed set builder notations are deemed impractical or overly complex for the limited set. A more detailed approach involves expressing terms as a function of a summation, but there is uncertainty about the validity of the pattern beyond the initial four terms. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the difficulty of applying set builder notation to small, specific sets.
kkp
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Ok, I am needing help turning (2, 5, 10, 17) into set builder notation. I know to get these you add odd numbers 3, 5, 7 but I can't wrap my mind around putting this into notation.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In other words, you are looking for a formula. Check for a changing difference between consecutive terms.
 
It's pretty pointless to use set builder notation for such a small set. (Homework always seems that way, doesn't it?)

Keep in mind that set builder notation is of the form

{expression | for <variable(s)> in {a bigger set} such that <condition>}

Here, you're working with integers, so the "bigger set" is going to be Z or Z+ or something.

The tricky part is figuring out a useful condition. For example, if your set was {2, 3, 5, 7, 11}, you could have said: {x | x in Z+ where x is prime and x <= 11}.
 
This question is silly. Here are some equally silly answers.

\{n | n\in\{2, 5, 10, 17\}\}
\{n | (n-2)(n-5)(n-10)(n-17)=0\}
\{n^2+1 | 1\le n\le4\}

The polynomial in the second answer can be rewritten as n^4 - 34n^3 + 369n^2 - 1460n + 1700, if you prefer.
 
Last edited:
How exactly to convert this into set builder notation, not sure; but I did some checking on the sequence of numbers.

The first term is obviously just 2.
After that, the next terms conform to 2 plus the sumation as index goes from 2 to i of three plus two times the expression (n-2);

In other words, I'm saying from the second term onward, the term is
2 + summation from 2 to i of (3 + 2(n-2)).

Some variation from that pattern might be possible (not sure) after n=4, since we might not be sure if only four terms as originally given were enough to build the pattern.
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K