Welcome to Gaia! ::

The Physics and Mathematics Guild

Back to Guilds

 

Tags: physics, mathematics, science, universe 

Reply Mathematics
Tutorial: Introduction to Naive Set Theory

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

mynabyrd

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 2:55 pm


Part One: Definitions.

What is a set? Simply put, a set is a collection of objects. Its' members are called elements. For example, call A the set of all animals. Some elements of A might be cows, chickens, and sheep. The elements of a set are usually contained in curly brackets, like so:

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

To say that a cow is an element of A, we would write

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

If one set has all the elements of another set, we call the smaller set a subset. For example, a subset of A could be a set called M, the set of all mammals. To say that M is a subset of A, we would write

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show..

Part Two: Operations on Sets.

Union "adds" all the elements of a set together. For example, take two sets

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

Then the union of B and C is denoted

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

See what happened there? B is in union with C, forming a new set that "adds" all their elements together.

Intersection is what two sets have "in common". For instance, take two sets

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

The intersection of B and C is then written as

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

The new set formed is made up of elements that belong to both B and C.

The set-theoretic difference, also known as the relative complement of two sets, takes one set and "subtracts" the elements of another set. For example, take two sets

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

Then the relative complement of B and C (in that order!) is denoted

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.

All we did here is remove the elements of C from B. Simple, huh?

Part Three: Special Sets.

Before we get into the exciting stuff, we need to introduce some very special sets:

The empty set is the set with no elements. The symbol for the empty set is Ø.

A rational number is a number that can be expressed as the ratio of two integers. The set of all rational numbers is denoted as Q.

An irrational number is any number that cannot be expressed as a ratio of two integers.

A real number is any number that is not complex. You can think of real numbers as the union of rational and irrational numbers. The set of real numbers is denoted as R.

Part Four: Infinite Sets and Countability.

Now for the fun stuff. whee

An infinite set is, intuitively speaking, a set that "goes on forever". An infinite set has an infinite number of elements.

Can one infinite set be bigger than another? The concept of countability addresses this issue.

Definition: A set is called "countable" if there can be a one-to-one correspondance established between the set in question and the set of positive integers, Z+.

What does this mean? Well, think about the term "one-to-one correspondence". All this means is that for every element of Z+, there is an element to "pair up with" in the set in question.

Now we can establish a few things about countable sets. I will not provide proofs due to space issues, but if you would like to see them, PM me:

Theorem One: Every subset of a countable set is countable.
Theorem Two: The union of a countable set is itself countable.
Theorem Three: Every infinite set has a countable subset.

We need to define another important concept now: the concept of equivalence. Two finite sets are called equivalent if they have the same number of elements. What of infinite sets? All countably infinite sets are equivalent to Z+, because they have the same number of elements.

Now for the question of uncountability:

Definition: A set is said to be "uncountable" if we cannot establish a one-to-one correspondence between the set in question and Z+.

We have defined two types of infinity: uncountability and countability. Intuitively speaking, uncountable sets are "bigger" than countable ones.

How does this work? Think about it: they really do represent two different concepts! For example, the set of all points on the number line is uncountable; there is an infinite amount of numbers between the integers. Uncountability represents this concept, while countability represents the more common "going on forever" concept of infinity.

I hope I have done a good job explaining these fascinating concepts -- feedback, questions, and discussion are very welcome. 3nodding
PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 3:40 pm


It's pretty good. The only things I'd add are the concepts of a function, preimage, and injective and surjective functions. I think it would help solidify the idea of countability.

Swordmaster Dragon


Baron von Turkeypants

PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:38 am


User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
It is well known that I am countably infinite.
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 3:46 pm


Baron von Turkeypants
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
It is well known that I am countably infinite.
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.


Okay O_o;;

mynabyrd


Layra-chan
Crew

PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 5:40 pm


Your definition of an irrational number as a number that cannot be expressed as the ratio of two integers doesn't really say anything about them not being complex, or quaternionic, or really anything about the reals. I acknowledge that the reals can't be stated very simply, but still, the distinction should be made.
PostPosted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:11 am


I'm with Layra here. It would be extremely annoying to solidify those concepts, considering it would involve defining the real numbers accurately. I think it's something that can be left out of a "set theory" introduction.

If you want to keep that section on special sets, however, I think you'd do well to include these sets:
Empty set (you have it already)
J_N = {1, 2, 3, ..., N}
J = {1, 2, 3, ...}
Z = integers = {..., -1, 0, 1, 2, ...} as the ring containing J with additive and multiplicative identities 0 and 1, respectively
Q = rationals = field of fractions of Z
A = algebraic numbers = solutions to all polynomials with rational coefficients
R = real numbers = field containing Q that has the least-upper bound property
C = complex numbers = algebraic closure of R

I'm sure some of those could be disregarded, but to really talk about an irrational or complex "number" you'd do well to define all of these sets. With all of these sets, you could include a demonstration of the countability of the algebraic numbers or the uncountability of the real numbers, and you can accurately define irrational and even transcendental numbers.

Swordmaster Dragon


mynabyrd

PostPosted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:29 pm


Thanks for the feedback. I'll try and add some to this tutorial when I get the time.
Reply
Mathematics

 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum