How can I prove [(A^B)-(B^C)]-(A^C)'=0 using contradiction?

In summary, the conversation discusses how to prove a statement by contradiction, specifically [(A^B)-(B^C)]-(A^C)'=0, where A, B, and C are sets. The method is to assume the statement is not equal to zero and then find a contradiction. The conversation goes through the steps of showing that if the statement is not equal to zero, there must be a contradiction. Ultimately, this proves that the statement is indeed equal to zero.
  • #1
mathrocks
106
0
I'm trying to prove the following by contradiction: [(A^B)-(B^C)]-(A^C)'=0. A, B, C are sets. All I know is in order to prove by contradiction you simply set the above not equal to zero. But I don't know where to go from there.

"^" means the intersection symbol.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Suppose

[tex](A \cap B - B \cap C) - (A \cap C)' \neq \emptyset[/tex].

Then there is some element [itex]x \in ((A \cap B - B \cap C) - (A \cap C)')[/itex]. But then

[tex]x \in A \cap B - B \cap C[/tex]
[tex]x \notin (A \cap C)'[/tex]

<=>

[tex]x \in A \cap B - B \cap C[/tex]
[tex]x \in A \cap C[/tex]

<=>

[tex]x \in A \cap B[/tex]
[tex]x \notin B \cap C[/tex]
[tex]x \in A \cap C[/tex]

<=>

[tex]x \in A[/tex]
[tex]x \in B[/tex]
[tex]x \notin B \cap C[/tex]
[tex]x \in A[/tex]
[tex]x \in C[/tex]

<=>

[tex]x \in A[/tex]
[tex]x \in B[/tex]
[tex]x \in C[/tex]
[tex]x \notin B \cap C[/tex].

Which is a contradiction.
 
  • #3
Suppose it is not zero. Then there is some element x in the set on the left side.
From the last term we infer that x is not an element of [itex](A \cap C)'[/itex], (does that ' mean the complement?) so:

[tex]x \in A, \quad \mbox{and } x \in C[/tex],

take it from there.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Ok, let's prove it by contradiction:
let's suppose that
(A^B-B^C)-(A^C)'=!0, where =! means "different to". Then, there is a element namely x such that x E(belongs to) (A^B-B^C)-(A^C)', then, xE(A^B-B^C) and xE!( not belongs to)(A^C)', then, xEA^B and xE!B^C and xEA^C, then
xEA, xEB, xEC and( xE!B or xE!C). Therefore, we have a contradiction.
 

1. What is a proof in relation to sets?

A proof in relation to sets is a logical argument that demonstrates the validity of a statement or relationship between sets. It involves using established rules and definitions to show that a given statement is true.

2. Why are proofs important in studying relations between sets?

Proofs are important in studying relations between sets because they provide a means of verifying the accuracy of mathematical statements and relationships. They also help to establish the foundations of mathematical concepts and theories.

3. What are the different types of proofs used in relations between sets?

The main types of proofs used in relations between sets are direct proofs, indirect proofs (also known as proof by contradiction), and proof by induction. Each type has its own specific format and purpose.

4. How do you construct a proof for a relationship between sets?

To construct a proof for a relationship between sets, you must first clearly state the relationship that you are trying to prove. Then, you must use logical reasoning and previously established rules and theorems to demonstrate the validity of the statement.

5. What are some common mistakes to avoid when writing proofs for relations between sets?

Some common mistakes to avoid when writing proofs for relations between sets include using incorrect or insufficient assumptions, making incorrect logical deductions, and not clearly stating each step of the proof. It is also important to carefully check for errors and to use precise mathematical language.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
760
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
433
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
2
Replies
35
Views
544
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
734
Back
Top