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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Unassuming
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between two sets A and B, specifically exploring whether the equivalence of the sets (denoted as A~B) implies the equivalence of their power sets (P(A)~P(B)). The context is rooted in concepts from set theory and analysis, particularly Cantor's theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to establish a bijection between sets A and B and subsequently between their power sets. Questions arise regarding the validity of their reasoning and the definitions of the functions involved. Some participants express uncertainty about their conclusions and seek clarification on the implications of their assumptions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants exploring various approaches to define bijections and questioning the assumptions made in their reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding the need to explicitly define the mapping functions, but there is no consensus on the correctness of the approaches presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of set theory while balancing their learning of proof methods in an introductory analysis course. There is an acknowledgment of the difficulty in connecting the concepts of bijections and power sets.

Unassuming
Messages
165
Reaction score
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
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)?
 
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?
 
?? 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.)
 
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?
 
But it doesn't appear that you've actually defined what G is!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K