What is the set notation for a sequence with a common difference of 3/4?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around constructing set notation for a sequence with a common difference of 3/4, specifically for the set containing the elements {-3/2, -3/4, 0, 3/4, 3/2, 9/4, 3, 15/4}. Participants explore how to accurately represent this set using mathematical notation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various attempts at creating set notation, including the original notation proposed by the original poster and subsequent suggestions for simplification. There is a focus on the implications of finite versus infinite sets and the correctness of the notation used.

Discussion Status

The conversation is active, with participants providing feedback on each other's notation and questioning the clarity and correctness of the proposed set representations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the simplification of notation, but no consensus has been reached on the best form.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the representation of finite versus infinite sets, as well as the proper use of set builder notation. Participants are also addressing the implications of notation order and clarity in mathematical expressions.

reenmachine
Gold Member
Messages
514
Reaction score
9

Homework Statement



The book I'm reading ask me to build a set notation for the following set: ##\{-3/2 , -3/4 , 0 , 3/4 , 3/2 , 9/4 , 3 , 15/4 \}##.

The Attempt at a Solution



I attempted to build a set notation and came with the result:

##\{ x \in R : \exists y\in Z \ \ y(3/4)= x\}##

My idea is that the sequence is always +3/4 or -3/4 , therefore any number in Z multiplied by 3/4 will be an element of the set we're trying to notate.

Thank you for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
reenmachine said:

Homework Statement



The book I'm reading ask me to build a set notation for the following set: ##\{-3/2 , -3/4 , 0 , 3/4 , 3/2 , 9/4 , 3 , 15/4 \}##.

The Attempt at a Solution



I attempted to build a set notation and came with the result:

##\{ x \in R : \exists y\in Z \ \ y(3/4)= x\}##

My idea is that the sequence is always +3/4 or -3/4 , therefore any number in Z multiplied by 3/4 will be an element of the set we're trying to notate.

Thank you for your help!

That's true enough, but the set your notation describes has an infinite number of elements. The original set you wrote down has only 8 elements. Your notation should be a little more specific. Or does the set you are trying to construct also have an infinite number of elements and you only showed 8 of them without a '...'?
 
There's also a way to simplify the notation. Fix the issue that Dick mentioned first, and then try to think of a way to simplify the notation.
 
Fredrik said:
There's also a way to simplify the notation. Fix the issue that Dick mentioned first, and then try to think of a way to simplify the notation.

I agree. But I think the set reenmachine wants to describe probably has more than 8 elements. I was just trying to clear that up. It's not all that useful to describe small finite sets using set builder notation. Otherwise why not write {x:x∈{−3/2,−3/4,0,3/4,3/2,9/4,3,15/4}}?
 
My apologies for the other thread , thought this one didn't work my computer crashed or something.

I made a mistake , the set I was supposed to find a notation for was the set ##\{... , -3/2 , -3/4 , 0 , 3/4 , 3/2 , 9/4 , 3 , 15/4 , ...\}##.

To simplify it , I could try: ##\{ n \in Z : n(3/4)\}## ?
 
reenmachine said:
My apologies for the other thread , thought this one didn't work my computer crashed or something.

I made a mistake , the set I was supposed to find a notation for was the set ##\{... , -3/2 , -3/4 , 0 , 3/4 , 3/2 , 9/4 , 3 , 15/4 , ...\}##.

To simplify it , I could try: ##\{ n \in Z : n(3/4)\}## ?
It would be {3n/4 : n ##\in## Z}
 
Mark44 said:
It would be {3n/4 : n ##\in## Z}

Is there really a difference? If so , is it the left-right factor or is it ##3n/4## versus the ##n(3/4)##?
 
reenmachine said:
Is there really a difference?

{n∈Z:n(3/4)} doesn't mean anything. What follows the ':' is supposed to be a true/false statement.
 
Dick said:
{n∈Z:n(3/4)} doesn't mean anything. What follows the ':' is supposed to be a true/false statement.

Ok , in that case , is ##\{ n(3/4) : n \in Z\}## the same as ##\{ 3n/4 : n \in Z\}##?
 
  • #10
reenmachine said:
Ok , in that case , is ##\{ n(3/4) : n \in Z\}## the same as ##\{ 3n/4 : n \in Z\}##?

Sure it is. 3n/4=(3/4)n. Isn't it?
 
  • #11
Yes, but written in a slightly different way. I reversed the order of things in what I wrote for the reason that Dick said.
 
  • #12
Thanks guys!

So basically , ##\{3n/4 : n \in Z\}## is the shortest way to describe the set with a set notation?
 
  • #13
reenmachine said:
Thanks guys!

So basically , ##\{3n/4 : n \in Z\}## is the shortest way to describe the set with a set notation?

I would say, yes.
 
  • #14
Thanks guys!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K