MHB Why does the inequality stand if there are no common elements?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between the power sets of two sets A and B, particularly when A and B have no common elements. It is established that if A and B are disjoint, then the union of their power sets, denoted as $\mathcal{P}A \cup \mathcal{P}B$, is a subset of the power set of their union, $\mathcal{P}(A \cup B)$. However, the equality $\mathcal{P}A \cup \mathcal{P}B = \mathcal{P}(A \cup B)$ only holds under specific conditions, namely when one set is a subset of the other. An example with A = {1} and B = {2} illustrates that the equality does not generally hold for disjoint sets. Thus, the discussion clarifies the conditions under which the power set equality is valid.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hi! (Smirk)

$$x \in \mathcal{P}A \cup \mathcal{P} B \rightarrow x \in \mathcal{P}A \lor x \in \mathcal{P}B \rightarrow x \subset A \lor x \subset B \rightarrow x \subset A \cup B \rightarrow x \in \mathcal{P} (A \cup B)$$

So, $\mathcal{P}A \cup \mathcal{P}B \subset P(A \cup B) $.

The equality stands, if $A \cap B=\varnothing$.

Could you explain me why the equality stands, if $A,B$ have no common elements? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
So, $\mathcal{P}A \cup \mathcal{P}B \subset P(A \cup B) $.

The equality stands, if $A \cap B=\varnothing$.
You can check that this is not so by picking $A=\{1\}$ and $B=\{2\}$. In fact, $\mathcal{P}A\cup\mathcal{P}B=\mathcal{P}(A\cup B)$ iff $A\subseteq B$ or $B\subseteq A$.
 
Greetings, I am studying probability theory [non-measure theory] from a textbook. I stumbled to the topic stating that Cauchy Distribution has no moments. It was not proved, and I tried working it via direct calculation of the improper integral of E[X^n] for the case n=1. Anyhow, I wanted to generalize this without success. I stumbled upon this thread here: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-to-prove-the-cauchy-distribution-has-no-moments.992416/ I really enjoyed the proof...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K