Proving ~Au~B= ~(AnB): A Comprehensive Explanation with Examples

  • Thread starter Thread starter jlemus85
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the set identity ~A ∪ ~B = ~(A ∩ B) using De Morgan's Law. The initial steps involve showing that if x belongs to ~A or ~B, then it cannot belong to the intersection A ∩ B, thus confirming x is in the complement of the intersection. The challenge arises in proving the reverse direction, where it is clarified that if x is not in A ∩ B, it must either not be in A or not be in B, leading to the conclusion that x is in ~A ∪ ~B. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the logical implications and definitions involved in set theory. Overall, the proof illustrates the relationship between complements and intersections in set operations.
jlemus85
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

Was hoping I could get some help with the following:

Note= ~ indicates the complement of
Prove that:

~Au~B= ~(AnB)
So far I have: Let x belong to ~Au~b then x belongs to ~A or x belongs to ~B.
If x belongs to ~A then x is not in A thus x is not in ~AnB so x belongs to ~(AnB).
If x belongs to ~B then x is not in B thus x is not in ~AnB so x belongs to ~(AnB)

I am having trouble going the other way because if x belongs to ~(AnB) then x is not in AnB, but does this mean it's not in AuB? When I picture AnB I see two circles that overlap each other (not completely), and that small part where they over lap, that is AnB. But if x is not in AnB, how can we say with certainty that it isn't in the Complement of AuB? Is it because the complement of AuB IS the intersection of A, B? Hope that makes sense!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All the steps are essentially reversible. The hard part is that you are effectively "lifting" De Morgan's Law from the logical domain to a set domain. The critical step, in effect, looks almost dubious because it's so obvious.

Let x be in ~(AnB). Thus, x is in not in AnB. (definition of complement)

If x is in A and x is in B, then x is in AnB. (definition of intersection)

If x is not in AnB, then it is not true that x is in A and x is in B. (contrapositive)

It is not true that x is in A and x is in B. (Inference)

Either x is not in A or x is not in B. (Logical de morgan's law, this is the critical step)

Either x is in ~A or x is in ~B. (Def. of complement).

x is in ~Au~B. (Def of union)
 
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 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
15K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K