Need Help Proving Powerset Inequality

  • Thread starter Hallucigen
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Inequality
In summary, this question asks you to prove that if two sets have a subset that is another set, then the two sets are in the same power set. You can use the addition rule of inference and the fact that every element in one set is a subset of an element in the other set to prove that the two sets are in the same power set.
  • #1
Hallucigen
1
0
Hey everyone,
Can I get some tips on this proof?

Powerset(A) U Powerset(B) ⊆ Powerset(A ∪ B)

not too sure how to prove that this is true... maybe some pointers? thanks. :biggrin:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Take something in the left hand side, and show it is in the right hand side. Although, this is one of those questions that is obviously true, and therefore it is difficult to jude precisely what one is required to write down for the teacher.
 
  • #3
What does it mean to be in the powerset of A? And what does it mean to be in the union?

That's all you need to know.
 
  • #4
Couple of pointers.

1. Set union is defined in terms of logical or. This should suggest proof by cases, where you will need only show details in case 1. Then state that case 2 follows mutatis mutandis. (See how your prof reacts to that.)

2. The Addition Rule of Inference will make life very easy in the case 1 "details".
 
  • #5
btw, a good question for you, is what condition on the sets should be met in order to be an equality?
 
  • #6
Think idempotence.
 
  • #7
Show that for arbitrary A and B

Powerset(A) U Powerset(B) ⊃ Powerset(A ∪ B)

leads to a contradiction.
 
  • #8
EnumaElish said:
Show that for arbitrary A and B
Powerset(A) U Powerset(B) ⊃ Powerset(A ∪ B)
leads to a contradiction.
Contradicting
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \supset \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

is not enough, as it only proves
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \subseteq \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]
(logical) OR
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \ne \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

To prove the OP statement, Hallucigen must also then contradict
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \ne \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

Hallucigen said:
Powerset(A) U Powerset(B) ⊆ Powerset(A ∪ B)
Why not just apply a simple direct proof? :redface:

[tex] x \in \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \, \cup \, \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \Rightarrow x \in \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \, \vee \, x \in \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \Rightarrow x \subseteq A \, \vee \, x \subseteq B \Rightarrow x \subseteq A \, \cup \, B \Rightarrow x \in \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

so therefore,
[tex]\thus \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \subseteq \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #9
bomba923 said:
To prove the OP statement, Hallucigen must also then contradict...

Since the proof will demonstrate that there is an element of P(AuB) not in P(A) or P(B) (since the reverse inclusion is clearly true), this is not particularly relevant information. Plus, not every one uses the strict set inequality symbol to mean strict set inequality.
 
  • #10
My post #7 should have read:

Show either ⊆ or ⊃ must be the case,
Show ⊃ leads to a contradiction.
 
  • #11
bomba923 said:
Contradicting
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \supset \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

is not enough, as it only proves
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \subseteq \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]
(logical) OR
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \ne \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

To prove the OP statement, Hallucigen must also then contradict
[tex] \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \ne \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]


Why not just apply a simple direct proof? :redface:

[tex] x \in \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \, \cup \, \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \Rightarrow x \in \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \, \vee \, x \in \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \Rightarrow x \subseteq A \, \vee \, x \subseteq B \Rightarrow x \subseteq A \, \cup \, B \Rightarrow x \in \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

so therefore,
[tex]\thus \mathcal{P} \left( A \right) \cup \mathcal{P} \left( B \right) \subseteq \mathcal{P} \left( A \cup B \right) [/tex]

How to use your method the prove/disprove this proof?
Powerset(A ∩ B) = Powerset(A) ∩ Powerset(B)
 
  • #12
jacktsoi said:
How to use your method the prove/disprove this proof?
Powerset(A ∩ B) = Powerset(A) ∩ Powerset(B)
To prove that theorem, you could use these theorems:

[tex]\forall X, Y, Z \ [Y = Z \leftrightarrow (X \in Y \leftrightarrow X \in Z)][/tex]
[tex]\forall X, Y \ [X \in \mathcal{P}(Y) \leftrightarrow X \subseteq Y][/tex]
[tex]\forall X, Y, Z \ [X \in (Y \cap Z) \leftrightarrow (X \in Y \wedge X \in Z)][/tex]
 
  • #13
You take an element X of Powerset(A) union Powerset(B)

X is either a subset of A or a subset of B.

Since Powerset(A union B) contains all subsets of A union B it contains all subsets of A that do not contain elements of B and all subsets of B that do not contain elements of A. Therefore, X is in Powerset(A union B)

Since every X in Powerset(A) union Powerset(B) is in Powerset(A union B), it follows that Powerset(A) union Powerset(B) is a subset of Powerset(A union B)

Thats a proof... you should not need to do anything fancier than give an explanation like that.
 

1. What is the Powerset Inequality?

The Powerset Inequality is a mathematical concept that states that the cardinality (size) of the powerset of a set is always greater than the cardinality of the original set. In other words, the powerset of a set always contains more elements than the set itself.

2. Why is it important to prove the Powerset Inequality?

Proving the Powerset Inequality is important because it helps us understand the relationship between sets and their powersets. It also allows us to make conclusions about the size and complexity of sets and their subsets.

3. How can the Powerset Inequality be proved?

The Powerset Inequality can be proved using mathematical induction. This involves proving that the inequality holds for the smallest possible set (usually an empty set), and then showing that if it holds for a set with n elements, it also holds for a set with n+1 elements.

4. Can the Powerset Inequality be applied to infinite sets?

Yes, the Powerset Inequality can be applied to infinite sets as well. In this case, the cardinality of the powerset of an infinite set will always be greater than or equal to the cardinality of the original set.

5. What are some real-world applications of the Powerset Inequality?

The Powerset Inequality has many applications in computer science, particularly in the field of algorithms and data structures. It is also used in the study of topology and in game theory, where it helps in understanding the possible outcomes of a game.

Similar threads

  • General Math
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
964
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
559
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
596
Back
Top