Sets Intersection Proof: G and {F(n)} Family of Sets

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a set intersection identity involving a family of sets denoted as $\{F(n): n \in \mathbb{K}\}$ and another set $G$. Participants explore the relationship between the intersection of $G$ with the intersection of the family of sets and the intersection of the family of sets with $G$. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and proof techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that to show $G \cap \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}F(n) = \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}(F(n) \cap G)$, it suffices to demonstrate that any element in one side is also in the other.
  • Another participant suggests using the approach of proving set equality by showing that elements of one set are in the other and vice versa.
  • A participant attempts to understand the proof by replacing the intersection with a complement and explores the implications of this change.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of an element being in or not being in the intersection of sets, particularly regarding the conditions under which elements belong to the sets involved.
  • One participant expresses confusion about their understanding of the proof and seeks clarification on their reasoning.
  • Several participants affirm the correctness of the reasoning presented by others, indicating a positive reception of the explanations provided.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the approach to proving the set intersection identity, with some exploring variations and clarifications. However, the discussion includes multiple perspectives on the reasoning process, indicating that while there is agreement on the method, the details and understanding may vary.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about specific steps in the proof, particularly when dealing with complements and intersections, which may indicate missing assumptions or unresolved mathematical nuances.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students or individuals interested in set theory, mathematical proofs, and those seeking to improve their understanding of set operations and proof techniques.

Guest2
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
If $G$ and $\left\{F(n): n \in \mathbb{K}\right\}$ are a family of sets, show that $\displaystyle G \cap \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}F(n) = \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}(F(n) \cap B).$

I said if $b$ is an ement of $\displaystyle G \cap \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}F(n)$ then $b$ is in both $G$ and $F(n)$ for every $n \in \mathbb{K}$. Say for example that there are $m$ lots of $n$ in $\mathbb{K}$ and denote these by $n_{1}, n_{2}, \cdots n_{m}$. We can pair each of $f(n_1), f(n_2), f(n_3), \cdots, f(n_m)$ with $G$ i.e. $b \in G \cap F(n_{1})$, $b \in G \cap F(n_{2})$, $b \in G \cap F(n_{3})$, $\cdots$, $b \in G \cap F(n_{m}).$ That's $b \in \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}(F(n) \cap B).$ Working backwards, implies $b \in G \cap F(n_{1})$, $b \in G \cap F(n_{2})$, $b \in G \cap F(n_{3})$, $\cdots$, $b \in G \cap F(n_{m})$. And we just get rid of the pairing - $b \in G$ and $b \in [f(n_1), f(n_2), f(n_3), \cdots, f(n_m)]$ i.e. $b \in G \cap \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}F(n)$. Therefore $\displaystyle G \cap \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}F(n) = \cap_{n \in \mathbb{K}}(F(n) \cap B).$

I'm pretty sure the above is pretty crap. Could someone please post up a proof - I'm completely lost on how to write maths proofs. I can prove bit more difficult stuff, but the fact that it appears something so obvious puts me off completely (I'm not sure how much to leave out etc).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here is a suggestion. When you have two sets $A$ and $B$ and you want to show $A=B$ you show that any element of $A$ is in $B$ and any element of $B$ is in $A$. Try using this approach.

You want to prove,
$$ A \cap \left( \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n \right) = \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\cap B_n) $$
If,
$$x\in A \cap \left( \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n \right) \implies x \in A \text{ and }x \in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n $$
Then, as $x\in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n$ it means $x\in B_n$ for every $n$.

Thus, $x\in A$ and $x\in B_n$, so $x\in (A\cap B_n)$ for every $n$. In particular,
$$ x\in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\cap B_n) $$
Now do the argument in reverse, if you know what I am sayin'.
 
Last edited:
ThePerfectHacker said:
Here is a suggestion. When you have two sets $A$ and $B$ and you want to show $A=B$ you show that any element of $A$ is in $B$ and any element of $B$ is in $A$. Try using this approach.

You want to prove,
$$ A \cap \left( \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n \right) = \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\cap B_n) $$
If,
$$x\in A \cap \left( \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n \right) \implies x \in A \text{ and }x \in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n $$
Then, as $x\in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n$ it means $x\in B_n$ for every $n$.

Thus, $x\in A$ and $x\in B_n$, so $x\in (A\cap B_n)$ for every $n$. In particular,
$$ x\in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\cap B_n) $$
Now do the argument in reverse, if you know what I am sayin'.
Thank you very much. That's what I've been trying to do, but failed horribly.

So suppose $ x\in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\cap B_n) $, then $ x \in (A \cap B_n)$ for every $n$, i.e. $x \in A$ and $x \in B_n$ for every $n$, that's $ x\in A \cap \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n. $
 
In an attempt to really understand the proof, I replaced one of the intersections with complement.

$$ A \setminus \left( \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n \right) = \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\setminus B_n) $$
If,
$$x\in A \setminus \left( \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n \right) \implies x \in A \text{ and }x \not \in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n $$
Then, as $x \not \in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n$ it means $x \not \in B_n$ for every $n$.

Thus, $x\in A$ and $x \not \in B_n$, so $x \in (A\setminus B_n)$ for every $n$. And

$$ x\in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\setminus B_n) $$

And we do the argument in reverse. I can't find my error. (Giggle)
 
If $x\in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n$ it means $x\in B_n$ for all $n$.

Thus,

If $x\not \in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n$ it means $x\not \in B_n$ for some $n$.
 
Oh, I see. Thanks. Is this right now then?

If,
$$x\in A \setminus \left( \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n \right) \implies x \in A \text{ and }x \not \in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n $$
Then, as $x \not \in \bigcap_{n=0}^{\infty} B_n$ it means $x \not \in B_n$ for some $n$.

Thus, $x\in A$ and $x \not \in B_n$, for some $n$, so $x \in (A\setminus B_n)$ for some $n$. In particular,

$$ x\in \bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\setminus B_n). $$

Doing the reverse, let $$ x\in \bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty} (A\setminus B_n). $$ Then $x \in (A\setminus B_n)$ for some $n$. That's $x\in A$ and $x \not \in B_n$ for some $n$ and the latter implies $ \displaystyle x \not \in \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty}B_n$, so $\displaystyle x \in A \setminus \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty}B_n$.

Therefore $\displaystyle A \setminus \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty}B_n = \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} (A \setminus B_n) $.
 
Very good.
 
ThePerfectHacker said:
Very good.
Thank you ever so much. I've learned a lot tonight.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K