Is A-(BnC)=(A-B)U(A-C) a Valid Equation in Set Theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter a_skier
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the validity of the equation A - (B ∩ C) = (A - B) ∪ (A - C) in set theory. Participants analyze the definitions of set difference and intersection, concluding that A - (B ∩ C) indeed represents elements in A that are not in both B and C. They clarify that (A - B) ∪ (A - C) captures elements in A that are not in B or not in C, thus supporting the equation. Some participants emphasize the need for rigorous justification of each step in the proof. The conversation highlights the importance of precise definitions in set theory to ensure correct conclusions.
a_skier
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
A-(B\bigcapC)=(A-B)\bigcup(A-C)

If A-B={xlx\inA and x\notinB}
A-C={xlx\inA and x\notinC}

then (A-B)\bigcup(A-C)={xlx\inA, x\notin(B and C)

Let X=A and Y=(B\bigcapC)

X-Y={xlx\inX and x\notinY}
x\notinY
x\notin(B\bigcapC)
x\notin(B and C)

Therefore, A-(B\bigcapC)=(A-B)\bigcup(A-C).

Is this anywhere close to being right? I want to self study some rigorous math this summer but the hard part is that I don't have anything to check against to see if my answers are correct or not.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
a_skier said:
A-(B\bigcapC)=(A-B)\bigcup(A-C)

If A-B={xlx\inA and x\notinB}
A-C={xlx\inA and x\notinC}

then (A-B)\bigcup(A-C)={xlx\inA, x\notin(B and C)

Let X=A and Y=(B\bigcapC)

X-Y={xlx\inX and x\notinY}
x\notinY
x\notin(B\bigcapC)
x\notin(B and C)

Therefore, A-(B\bigcapC)=(A-B)\bigcup(A-C).

Is this anywhere close to being right? I want to self study some rigorous math this summer but the hard part is that I don't have anything to check against to see if my answers are correct or not.

(A-B)\bigcup(A-C)={xlx\inA, x\notin(B and C)
has to be justified.

also "and" and "\bigcap" are the same.
 
I always find it fascinating that people use latex just for a single symbol, instead of formatting whole expression.

A-(B\cap C)=(A-B)\cup(A-C)
 
Ok so I worked through all the exercises up to this one. Here's what I came up with.

prove:
A−(B\capC)=(A−B)\cup(A−C)

Let S=B\capC={xlx\inB, and x\inC} (By the definition of intersection)

Thus A-S={xlx\inA and x\notinS}
={xlx\inA,x\notinB, and x\notinC} (see justification 1)

Next, let S_{1}=A-B={xlx\inA and x\notinB}
let S_{2}=A-C={xlx\inA and x\notinC}

Thus, S_{1}\cupS_{2}={xlx\inA. x\notinB, and x\notinC} (by the definition of union - see 2)

Therefore: A-S=S_{1}\cupS_{2}

Justifications:

1)A-B={xlx\inA and x\notinB}
2) Union is defined as the set of those elements which are in A, in B, or in both. Therefore if A={xlx satisfies P and x\notinC} and B={xlx satisfies Q and x\notinD} (where P and Q are arbitrary conditions and C and D are other sets) then A\cupB= {xlx satisfies P,Q, x\notinC, and x\notinD}.

What do you guys think?
 
Thus A-S={xlx∈ A and x∉ S}
={xlx∈ A,x∉ B, and x∉ C} (see justification 1)

Wrong: should be {xlx∈ A and (x∉ B or x∉ C)}
 
If there are an infinite number of natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and... then that must mean that there are not only infinite infinities, but an infinite number of those infinities. and an infinite number of those...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 132 ·
5
Replies
132
Views
20K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
15K