Prove or find counterexamples

  • Thread starter Thread starter mbcsantin
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around proving the associative property of the binary product for sets, specifically that (A x B) x C = A x (B x C). Participants clarify that the equality holds true and is known as the Associative Property of Multiplication. There is confusion regarding the initial question, as the original poster mixes concepts of sets and real numbers. The conversation emphasizes the importance of clearly defining the context and terms used in mathematical discussions. Ultimately, the need for clarity in questions about mathematical properties is highlighted.
mbcsantin
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
..using only the definition of the binary product:

for any sets A, B, C in a universe U:

(A x B) x C = A x (B x C)

I have no clue how to even get started with this one. Somebody help me please!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Typically you would want to show that both inclusions are true...but in this case...is the element ((a,b),c) = (a,(b,c)) ?
 
daveyinaz said:
Typically you would want to show that both inclusions are true...but in this case...is the element ((a,b),c) = (a,(b,c)) ?

Yes, they're equal. It's called the Associative Property of Multiplication.

The property which states that for all real numbers a, b, and c, their product is always the same, regardless of their grouping:
(a . b) . c = a . (b . c)
 
I'm sorry..I didn't read the your post correctly if that's the case..was thinking cartesian product.
 
mbcsantin said:
Yes, they're equal. It's called the Associative Property of Multiplication.

The property which states that for all real numbers a, b, and c, their product is always the same, regardless of their grouping:
(a . b) . c = a . (b . c)

Then please go back and ask whatever question you are REALLY asking. In your original post, A, B, and C are sets. Now you are telling us that they are real numbers. Also in your first post you asked about proving "A x(B x C)= (A x B)x C" but now you are saying that is the "Associative Property of Multiplication" which apparently you are accepting as true. At this point, I have no idea what your question really is!
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top