Industry-relevant training in Business, Technology, and Design to help professionals and graduates upskill for real-world careers.
Fun, engaging games to boost memory, math fluency, typing speed, and English skills—perfect for learners of all ages.
Enroll to start learning
You’ve not yet enrolled in this course. Please enroll for free to listen to audio lessons, classroom podcasts and take practice test.
Listen to a student-teacher conversation explaining the topic in a relatable way.
Today, we're going to discuss arbitrary sets A and B, particularly how their intersections with other sets, like set C, can help us deduce relationships. First off, can anyone remind me what an intersection is?
It's where two sets share common elements!
Exactly! If C is any set, we can express this as (A ∩ C) and (B ∩ C). So if we say (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ C), what does that mean?
It means that every element in A that is also in C is also in B that is in C.
Exactly! This is very important, as it sets the stage for proving A ⊆ B. Let's dig deeper!
Let’s assume our premise holds: if (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ C), then how do we show that A ⊆ B?
We can substitute C = A, right?
That's right! By substituting C = A, we get A ∩ A ⊆ B ∩ A. What does A ∩ A simplify to?
It simplifies to A!
Correct! So, we have A ⊆ (B ∩ A). What does that mean for an arbitrary element x in A?
If x is in A, then it must also be in (B ∩ A). That means it's in both A and B.
Exactly! Thus, we conclude A ⊆ B. Great job, everyone!
Let’s shift our focus to properties of relations. Who can define a symmetric relation?
A relation is symmetric if whenever (a, b) is in the relation, then (b, a) is also in it.
Correct! Now, can someone tell me what an anti-symmetric relation is?
It's when both (a, b) and (b, a) are present only if a = b.
Right! And how about irreflexivity?
No element should relate to itself, so (a, a) cannot be in the relation.
Fantastic! Keep these definitions in mind as we explore how many relations we can form based on these properties.
Now, let's count these relations. Starting with symmetric relations, if I have n elements, how many ordered pairs exist?
There are n² possible ordered pairs.
Exactly! So for symmetric relations, we consider pairs. If we decide on one (i, j), what must we include?
We must also include (j, i)! Hence we can choose from the upper triangle of an n × n matrix.
Correct! And how about anti-symmetric relations?
We can have either (i, j) or (j, i), but not both unless i = j.
Great insight! So, counting these distinct properties gives us a comprehensive view of set relations.
Let’s put this all together. If I have n elements and want to find anti-symmetric relations, can anyone describe our counting strategy?
We consider n diagonal pairs, and for non-diagonal pairs, we have restricted choices.
Right! For each of these pairs, we can decide to include or exclude them. Hence, we arrive at our total count of 2ⁿ for diagonal pairs and varied count for others. This is crucial in understanding how we build complex relations!
Read a summary of the section's main ideas. Choose from Basic, Medium, or Detailed.
In this section, the author demonstrates how to deduce subset relations using arbitrary sets and logical implications. The proofs illustrate properties like symmetry, anti-symmetry, reflexivity, and irreflexivity through notable theorems and examples.
This section is an exploration of set theory, focusing particularly on the relationships between arbitrary sets A and B and the implications of their intersections with other sets C. The author starts by establishing that if (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ C) for any set C, then it follows that A must be a subset of B (A ⊆ B). This is demonstrated through an interactive proof strategy where specific substitutions (e.g., C = A) simplify the proof process.
The section goes on to analyze broader properties of relations, which can be classified into categories such as symmetric, anti-symmetric, reflexive, and irreflexive. The necessity and implications of each relation type are discussed, with proofs and justifications provided. The exploration is rich in examples and mathematical reasoning, as the author systematically deduces the number of such relations over a finite set S consisting of n elements. Each property is explored in depth, culminating in a thorough understanding of how sets and their relations operate.
Dive deep into the subject with an immersive audiobook experience.
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Here you are given that arbitrary sets A and B. And the sets A and B as such that, this condition holds namely (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩C) for any set C that you consider. If that is the case and you have to show that A ⊆ B, so you are given the premise that the (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ C) for any set C.
We start with two arbitrary sets, A and B. The premise given is that for any set C, the intersection of A with C is a subset of the intersection of B with C. This is symbolically represented as (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ C). To show that set A is a subset of set B (A ⊆ B), we can manipulate this condition for a specific choice of C.
Imagine A and B as two groups of friends, each group representing a set. The given condition states that every common friend in any new circle of friends (set C) that you form with A (first group) will also be a common friend in any new circle formed with B (second group). You need to prove that if a person is in group A, they must also be in group B.
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Since this condition holds for any set C if I substitute C = A in this condition then I get that A ∩ A ⊆ B ∩ A, but I know that A ∩ A is nothing but the set A, so that means I can say that my premise, which I obtained by substituting C = A is that is A ⊆ A ∩ B.
To further analyze the implication of our premise, we substitute C with the set A itself. This means we are looking specifically at the intersection of A with itself along with the intersection of B and A. Notably, the intersection of A with A is just A, allowing us to simplify our premise to the statement A ⊆ (A ∩ B).
Continuing with the group of friends analogy, if we consider the group A itself as our new circle of friends (C), we find that all members of group A must also belong to the shared friendships with group B. Because every friend of group A is certainly a friend of themselves, this reinforces our understanding that set A must intersect with group B.
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Now my goal is to show that A ⊆ B, so for showing that A ⊆ B; I have to show that you take any element x in the set A, it should be present in the set B as well.
To prove that A is a subset of B, we need to demonstrate that any arbitrary element x taken from set A must also belong to set B. This is central to establishing the subset relationship. By using the premise established previously, we deduce the implications of x being in A and, consequently, in A ∩ B.
Think of an element x from group A as a specific friend in a circle of friends. We aim to show that this friend is also a part of the circle of friends in group B. If we can confirm that every friend in A also has a counterpart in B, we prove that A is simply a smaller group within the larger network that B represents.
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
So, what I have established here is that if I start with an arbitrary element x which is present in the set A, I have established that it is present in the set B as well where and since x was chosen arbitrarily here. This is true for any element x that you choose from the set A and hence I get the conclusion that A ⊆ B.
After demonstrating that any arbitrary element x from set A must be within set B, we conclude our proof. Since x was chosen without any specific restrictions, this argument holds for all elements within A. Consequently, we conclude A is indeed a subset of B (A ⊆ B).
Returning to our friends analogy, after showing that every chosen friend from group A also fits within group B, we confirm that all friends in group A are also friends in group B. Hence, we can declare that group A is smaller or equal in its relationships compared to group B.
Learn essential terms and foundational ideas that form the basis of the topic.
Key Concepts
Set: A collection of distinct objects that is treated as a whole.
Intersection: A set containing common elements from two sets.
Subset: A set that is contained within another set.
Symmetric Relation: A relation where both (a, b) and (b, a) exist.
Anti-Symmetric Relation: A relation defined by strict conditions on the existence of pairs.
Irreflexive Relation: A relation where (a, a) does not hold for any element.
Reflexive Relation: A relation requiring (a, a) for every element.
See how the concepts apply in real-world scenarios to understand their practical implications.
Example of Sets: A = {1, 2}, B = {2, 3}. Here, A ∩ B = {2}.
Example of Symmetric Relation: R = {(1, 2), (2, 1)} is symmetric.
Example of Anti-Symmetric Relation: R = {(1, 2)} is anti-symmetric since (2, 1) is not present.
Use mnemonics, acronyms, or visual cues to help remember key information more easily.
In the world of sets we see, A and B can dance in glee; If they share, that’s the way, Intersections here to play.
In a land of numbers, A and B met under the 'C' tree. The elements intermingled, forming friendships by sharing the fruits (elements) that dropped from the tree.
Remember SARA for relations: Symmetric, Anti-Symmetric, Reflexive, and Irreflexive. Each type has its rules like a game!
Review key concepts with flashcards.
Review the Definitions for terms.
Term: Set
Definition:
A collection of distinct objects, considered as an object in its own right.
Term: Intersection
Definition:
The set containing all elements that are common to both sets.
Term: Subset
Definition:
A set A is a subset of set B if all elements of A are also elements of B.
Term: Symmetric Relation
Definition:
A relationship in which if (a, b) is in R, then (b, a) must also be in R.
Term: AntiSymmetric Relation
Definition:
A relationship where if both (a, b) and (b, a) are in R, then a must equal b.
Term: Irreflexive Relation
Definition:
A relation where no element a has the property (a, a) in R.
Term: Reflexive Relation
Definition:
A relation where every element a must relate to itself (a, a) in R.
Term: Ordered Pair
Definition:
A pair of elements in a specific order, denoted (a, b).