Is \bigcap(F \cup G) equal to (\cap F)\bigcap(\cap G)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Klungo
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
1 reply · 2K views
Klungo
Messages
135
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


(Title is wrong)

I was able to prove the similar [itex]\bigcup(F \cup G)=(\cup F)\bigcup(\cup G)[/itex] but I'm not to sure how to go about this one.

Let F and G be nonempty families of sets. Prove
[itex]\bigcap(F \cup G)=(\cap F)\bigcap(\cap G)[/itex]

2. The attempt at a solution
To prove [itex]\bigcap(F \cup G) \subset (\cap F)\bigcap(\cap G)[/itex],
let [itex]x \subset \bigcap(F \cup G)[/itex] be arbitrary. Clearly, [itex]x \in S[/itex] for some set [itex]S \subset \bigcap F \cup G[/itex] containing all common elements in [itex]F \cup G[/itex]. We have [itex]S \in F \cup G.[/itex]

Do I go by..

We have two cases: (only one needs to be proven really.)
Case 1: [itex]If S \in F[/itex], clearly [itex]S \subset \cup F[/itex]...
(I'm stuck here)

or Do I go by...

Suppose [itex]S \in F[/itex] and [itex]S \in G[/itex]. Clearly [itex]S \subset \cup F[/itex] and [itex]S \subset \cup G[/itex]. (I'm stuck here)

I'll try proving the converse and restart the proof since I misread the problem.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
By definition of the operation [itex]\bigcap[/itex], any x in [itex]\bigcap(F\cup G)[/itex] must be contained in EVERY SET of [itex]F\cup G[/itex]. Continue from here.