Validating Set Equivalencies: A Logical Approach

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sorgen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on validating logical equivalences in set theory, specifically the identity C \backslash (A \Delta B) = (A \cap C) \Delta (C \backslash B). The user attempts to justify their steps in manipulating set expressions, particularly the dropping of terms based on the definition of symmetric difference. The final conclusion confirms that the manipulation is correct, as contradictions allow for the removal of certain terms from both sides of the equation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of set theory concepts, including symmetric difference and intersection.
  • Familiarity with logical equivalences and their applications in set notation.
  • Proficiency in manipulating set expressions and using set notation accurately.
  • Basic knowledge of LaTeX for mathematical expressions (optional but helpful).
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of symmetric difference in set theory.
  • Learn about logical equivalences and their proofs in set operations.
  • Explore advanced set notation and its applications in mathematical logic.
  • Practice solving set theory problems using LaTeX for clear representation.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in mathematics, particularly those focusing on set theory and logical reasoning, as well as anyone looking to deepen their understanding of set operations and equivalences.

Sorgen
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Alright so I was trying to solve this using logical equivalences:

Fill in the blanks to make true identities:
[itex]C \backslash ( A \Delta B) = (A \cap C) \Delta[/itex] ______

I made it to the end where I stated that the missing part was (C\B), but I'm not sure if my last step was justified

Homework Equations


Equivalences 3. The Attempt at a Solution [\b]

I'll skip most of the steps (there were about 9) because I suck at latex but the last few are (working from the left side):

[itex][ ( x \in C \wedge x \in A) \wedge (x \notin A \vee x \in B) ] \vee [ (x \in C \wedge x \notin B) \wedge (x \notin A \vee x \in B) ] \\<br /> [ (C \cap A) \cap (B \cup (x \notin A) ] \cap [ (C \backslash B) \cap (B \cup (x \notin A) ] \\<br /> C \backslash (A \Delta B) = (A \cap C) \Delta (C \backslash B)[/itex]

So in the 2nd to last step, I dropped [tex](B \cup (x \notin A)[/tex] from both sides of the union because of the definition of symmetric difference which says that they would be dropped even if I left them in. Is this correctly justified?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Screw latex, here's a scan of my work

anyway, in the 2nd to last step I dropped (B union ...) out of both sides due to the fact that they would get dropped anyway when symmetric difference was thrown in, is this justified?
 

Attachments

  • fill in blanks....jpg
    fill in blanks....jpg
    19 KB · Views: 512
Okay so I rewrote [itex][ ( B \cup ( x \notin A ) ][/itex] because I realized that notation doesn't make any sense (which I originally knew but wasn't sure how to express the -xEA part in set notation) and came up with [itex][ B \cup ( C \backslash A ) ][/itex] which I believe is a way of representing that in this context (where the only values we are talking about are represented in sets A B and C)

Is this rewrite correct or is there some way of representing -xEA using set notation that I don't know about?

Anyway, after plugging that in I realized that the 2nd to last line reads:
[itex][ ( C \cap A ) \cap ( B \cup ( C \backslash A ) ] \cup [ ( C \backslash B ) \cap ( B \cup ( C \backslash A ) ][/itex]
And because of the first part which reads [itex][ ( C \cap A ) ][/itex], having [itex][ (C \cap A ) \cap ( C \backslash A ) ][/itex] is a contradiction, and because of that I can drop [itex]( C \backslash A )[/itex] from the equation on both sides.

Then, again because of the definition of symmetric difference (and because it's also a contradiction) I drop the [itex]\cap B[/itex] from both sides because it would be removed regardless.

Is this correct?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K