MHB Is Theorem 5.2 in SET THEORY AND LOGIC True or False?

AI Thread Summary
Theorem 5.2 from "SET THEORY AND LOGIC" states that if for all sets A, A ∪ B = A, then B must be the empty set (0). The initial argument supports the theorem by showing that if A is the empty set, then B must also be empty. However, a counterexample is presented where A = {1, 2, 3} and B = {1, 2}, which satisfies A ∪ B = A while B is not empty. This indicates that the theorem is false, as the counterexample disproves the necessity of B being the empty set. Thus, the theorem does not hold true universally.
solakis1
Messages
407
Reaction score
0
In the book: SET THEORY AND LOGIC By ROBERT S.STOLL in page 19 the following theorem ,No 5.2 in the book ,is given:

If,for all A, AUB=A ,then B=0

IS that true or false

If false give a counter example

If true give a proof
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
This is true.
To prove the same we have $A \cup B = A $ iff $B \subseteq A$

Let us take 2 sets $A_1,A_2$ which are disjoint and because it is true for every set $A_1 \cup B = A_1 $ so $B \subseteq A_1$

and $A_2 \cup B = A_2 $ so $B \subseteq A_2$

so from above 2 we have

$B \subseteq A_1 \cap A_2$

because $A_1,A_2$ are disjoint sets so we have $A_1 \cap A_2= \emptyset$

so $B = \emptyset$
 
[sp]Thanks ...Let $$\forall A[A\cup B=A]$$............1

put $$A=0$$ and 1 becomes $$0\cup B=0$$

And $$B=0$$ since $$0\cup B=B$$

Note 0 is the empty set

However somebody sujested the following counter example:

A={1,2,3}...B={1,2} so we have :$$A\cup B=A$$ and $$\neg(B=0)$$ [/sp]
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top