MHB Why can it consist of only one element of a?

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Element
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of sets, particularly the singleton set, which consists of only one element, denoted as {a}. It emphasizes that {a} is equal to {a,a} due to the axiom of extensionality, which states that sets are defined by their elements, making {1,1} equal to {1}. The conversation also touches on the distinction between sets and multisets, noting that multisets can contain multiple instances of the same element. The participants clarify that while {a} contains one element, it does not consist of multiple instances of that element. Overall, the discussion reinforces foundational principles of set theory and the nature of equality among sets.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hey! (Nerd)

If $a,b$ sets, then we symbolize $\{ a,b\}$, the set that has as elements $a$ and $b$ and only these.

If $\{ a, b \}$ a set of pair and $a=b$, then we write $\{a,a \}=\{a \}$ and the set $\{ a \}$ is called the singleton, that consists of only one element of $a$.

Why can $\{a\}$ consist of only one element of $a$ ? (Thinking)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
Why can $\{a\}$ consist of only one element of $a$ ?
Strictly speaking, it is not the case that $\{a\}$ consists of only one element of $a$; rather, $\{a\}$ consists of only one element, namely, $a$.

By definition of $\{a,b\}$, we have
\[
x\in \{a,b\}\leftrightarrow x=a\lor x=b.\qquad(*)
\]
Also by definition, $\{a\}=\{a,a\}$. Instantiating (*) with $\{a\}$ (i.e., when $a=b$), we get
\[
x\in \{a\}\leftrightarrow x=a\lor x=a\leftrightarrow x=a.
\]
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Strictly speaking, it is not the case that $\{a\}$ consists of only one element of $a$; rather, $\{a\}$ consists of only one element, namely, $a$.

By definition of $\{a,b\}$, we have
\[
x\in \{a,b\}\leftrightarrow x=a\lor x=b.\qquad(*)
\]
Also by definition, $\{a\}=\{a,a\}$. Instantiating (*) with $\{a\}$ (i.e., when $a=b$), we get
\[
x\in \{a\}\leftrightarrow x=a\lor x=a\leftrightarrow x=a.
\]

I understand... Thank you very much! (Clapping)
 
Note that:

$P \vee P \iff P$

"If I am going to the store, or, I'm going to the store, then, I'm going to the store. Moreover, if I'm going to the store, then surely, either I'm going to the store, or...I'm going to the store!"

Note as well, that:

$\{a,a\} = \{a\} \cup \{a\}$

More pointedly: "sets are not multisets", or as G. Spenser-Brown says, in The Laws of Form (paraphrased):

To call again, is to call.
 
This is actually known as the axiom of extensionality. It is defined that two sets $A$ and $B$ are equal if every element of $A$ is in $B$. From this follows that $\{1, 1\}$ for example is equal to the singleton set $\{1\}$.

However, this is only an axiom. There are set-like structures for which this axiom doesn't hold, e.g., $\{1, 1\}$ and $\{1\}$ differs. A multiset is an example of such a structure, for example.

EDIT : Ah, Deveno beat me to it.
 
mathbalarka said:
This is actually known as the axiom of extensionality. It is defined that two sets $A$ and $B$ are equal if every element of $A$ is in $B$. From this follows that $\{1, 1\}$ for example is equal to the singleton set $\{1\}$.

However, this is only an axiom. There are set-like structures for which this axiom doesn't hold, e.g., $\{1, 1\}$ and $\{1\}$ differs. A multiset is an example of such a structure, for example.

EDIT : Ah, Deveno beat me to it.

Do we get extra credit for thinking of the same thing, at the same time?
 
Deveno said:
Do we get extra credit for thinking of the same thing, at the same time?

Hahaha, probably not. We'll be marked as copy-cats by the examiners soon enough.
 
Back
Top