The book I'm reading says that from [tex]p \in A[/tex] and [tex]A \in M[/tex] it does not follow that [tex]p \in M[/tex], if [tex]M[/tex] is a family of sets and [tex]p[/tex] is an element of [tex]A[/tex].(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

However, then further down on the same page it says that for any sets [tex]A, B, C[/tex] it is true that if [tex]A \subseteq B[/tex] and [tex]B \subseteq C[/tex], then [tex]A \subseteq C[/tex].

What's the difference between the two? Lets say I consider [tex]A[/tex] to be an element of [tex]B[/tex], then according to the first example, it does not follow that [tex]A \in C[/tex].

What's the difference between considering something to be an element of something else and something to be a subset of something?

- Kamataat

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Something to be a subset of something?

Loading...

Similar Threads - Something subset something | Date |
---|---|

B Subsets of Rational Numbers and Well-Ordered Sets | May 31, 2017 |

Something I discovered doing logic | Sep 29, 2015 |

A method for proving something about all sets in ZFC | May 12, 2015 |

Bayes theorem, answer way too small something wrong? | Feb 16, 2015 |

I Discovered something crazy | May 25, 2014 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**