Is A~B equivalent to P(A)~P(B)?

  • Thread starter Unassuming
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary: Also, you need to show that G is both injective and surjective, in order for it to be a bijection. You have not shown this.In summary, by using the fact that A~B and the fact that F:A->B is a bijection, we can define a bijection G:P(A)->P(B) that maps sets in P(A) to sets in P(B). However, the exact definition of G and its properties must be determined in order to prove the bijection.
  • #1
Unassuming
167
0

Homework Statement


If A~B, then P(A)~P(B), which means the same as,

If |A|=|B|, then |P(A)|=|P(B)|


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


This problem is difficult for me because I am trying to learn the methods of proof while at the same time taking Intro Analysis. Anyway, here are my thoughts...

Assume f: A->B is a bijection. From Cantor's Thm. we know that |A|<|P(A)| and |B|<|P(B)|.

I also know that since |A|=|B|, |B|<|P(A)| and |A|<|P(B)|.

After this I feel like saying |P(A)|=|P(B)|, but I feel kind of guilty with that.

Any proof, insight, hint, or a one-liner would be appreciated. Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Unassuming said:
Assume f: A->B is a bijection. From Cantor's Thm. we know that |A|<|P(A)| and |B|<|P(B)|.

I also know that since |A|=|B|, |B|<|P(A)| and |A|<|P(B)|.

After this I feel like saying |P(A)|=|P(B)|, but I feel kind of guilty with that.
You should! It's like saying 3=4 because 1<3 and 1<4!

Let's back-track. We know there is a bijection f:A->B. Can you use this to write down a bijection F:P(A)->P(B)?
 
  • #3
This is a try,

Let a1,a2,...,ai, be a sequence of elements of P(A).

Let b1,b2,...,bi, be a sequence of elements of P(B).

Define F:P(A) --> P(B) as the function that takes an to bn such that n [tex]\in[/tex] I, the index function of i.

Would this be a bijection?
 
  • #4
?? You have not used the fact that A~ B! Also I don't know why you are dealing with sequences. If X is a member of P(A), what can you map it to in P(B)? (X is a set of things in A, and there is a mapping from A to B.)
 
  • #5
This is another try,

Define F: A --> B, we know that F is bijective.
Define G:P(A) --> P(B). Let Xi be any set in P(A).
Then G(Xi) maps to an element of P(B), say Yi.
Since A~B, then P(A)~P(B)

Would this be a bijection?
 
  • #6
But it doesn't appear that you've actually defined what G is!
 

What is the concept of "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof"?

The concept of "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof" is a logical statement that shows that if two sets, A and B, are equivalent or have the same elements, then the probability of an event occurring in set A is equivalent to the probability of the same event occurring in set B.

How do you prove "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B)" using set theory?

To prove "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B)" using set theory, you would use the definition of equivalent sets, which states that two sets are equivalent if they have the same number of elements. Then, you would use the definition of probability, which is the number of favorable outcomes divided by the total number of possible outcomes, to show that the probability of an event occurring in set A is equal to the probability of the same event occurring in set B.

What is the importance of understanding "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof" in science?

Understanding "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof" is important in science because it allows us to make logical conclusions about the probability of events occurring in equivalent sets. This can be applied in various fields of science, such as genetics, where understanding the probability of certain traits being inherited can help in predicting outcomes.

Can you provide an example of "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof" in a real-life scenario?

One example of "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof" in a real-life scenario is flipping a coin. If we have two identical coins, A and B, and we want to know the probability of getting heads on coin A, we can use the proof to conclude that the probability of getting heads on coin A is equal to the probability of getting heads on coin B.

What are some common misconceptions about "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof"?

One common misconception about "If A~B, then P(A)~P(B) proof" is that it only applies to two sets that are exactly the same. However, the proof can also be applied to sets that are equivalent, meaning they have the same number of elements but may not be identical. Another misconception is that it only applies to probability, but it can also be used to show equivalency in other mathematical concepts, such as geometry or algebra.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
795
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
962
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
537
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
768
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
872
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top