Proving the Set Operation (A ∪ B) - (A ∩ B) = (A - B) ∪ (B - A)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a set operation involving unions and intersections: (A ∪ B) - (A ∩ B) = (A - B) ∪ (B - A). The original poster expresses difficulty in understanding how to approach this proof within the context of set theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various attempts to manipulate the expressions involved in the proof. The original poster has tried breaking down the equation by letting an element x belong to one side and attempting to show it belongs to the other side. Some participants inquire about specific steps taken and suggest checking for logical errors.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing feedback on each other's reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding the interpretation of set operations, and there is a recognition of the challenges faced by the original poster in grasping the concepts of set theory.

Contextual Notes

The original poster mentions having limited exposure to set theory, indicating that this is a learning process for them. There is also a reference to the context of a linear algebra class, which may contribute to some confusion regarding the subject matter.

TheIconoclast
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi, I am having trouble trying to prove the following operation: (A union B)-(A intersect B)=(A-B)union(B-A) given that: A-B = {x:x belong to A and x does not belong to B}. Thank you!


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is not linear algebra; it is set theory.

Anyway, where are you having problems and what have you tried ?
 
Sorry, I wrote linear algebra because we are having to learn this in my linear algebra class. Thanks for the correction.

It seems like I have tried everything i can think of. I have began by letting x belong to one side of the equation and logically taking that side apart to turn it into the other side of the equation. I have tried this for both sides and have come up short. I have also tried entering x belong to A and x does not belong to B for (A-B) on multiple occasions and have come up short there too. I don't know if there is some special trick to the proof.
 
Can you post what you have so that we can help you out ? Perhaps there is a logical error somewhere, or perhaps just a simple mistake.
 
Well I've tried many different variations but the one I'm looking at now is this:
Let x belong to (A-B)U(B-A)
(x belongs to A and x does not belong to B) or ((x belongs to B)-(x belongs to A))

I chose this side of the equation because on the other side there are two operations (union, and intersect) and if I substitute:x belongs to A and x does not belong to B, for A-B I can introduce another operation.
 
TheIconoclast said:
Well I've tried many different variations but the one I'm looking at now is this:
Let x belong to (A-B)U(B-A)
(x belongs to A and x does not belong to B) or ((x belongs to B)-(x belongs to A))

I chose this side of the equation because on the other side there are two operations (union, and intersect) and if I substitute:x belongs to A and x does not belong to B, for A-B I can introduce another operation.
I would start the following way.

x \in (A \cup B)-(A \cap B)

What this means is that either x \in A \quad or \quad x \in B but not both.If x \in (A \cup B)-(A \cap B) and x is in A. Then x is automatically in A-B.
If x \in (A \cup B)-(A \cap B) but not in A then it is in B. Hence, it is automatically in B-A.

Then continue...
 
Sorry I am confused. What exactly do you mean by x is automatically in A-B?
 
TheIconoclast said:
Sorry I am confused. What exactly do you mean by x is automatically in A-B?
If x \in (A \cup B)-(A \cap B)then x is either in A or B but x cannot be in both A and B.

So if x \in (A \cup B)-(A \cap B) then x \in A-B or B -A.

x in A-B means x is only in A and not B ! Which is exactly was the left handside of the orginal equation is saying.

or

x in B-A means the same thing as the above but with A and B exchanged.
 
Ok i was thinking about these operations the wrong way. I've only had one lecture on set theory so I its expected. Thank you very much. You've helped my understanding on the matter.
 
  • #10
Please, post more if you need more help.
 
  • #11
Will do. Thank you very much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K