Example1.1
Let be the universal set and suppose that
Then
📚 The CoCalc Library - books, templates and other resources
Important: to view this notebook properly you will need to execute the cell above, which assumes you have an Internet connection. It should already be selected, or place your cursor anywhere above to select. Then press the "Run" button in the menu bar above (the right-pointing arrowhead), or press Shift-Enter on your keyboard.
ParseError: KaTeX parse error: \newcommand{\lt} attempting to redefine \lt; use \renewcommand
A is a well-defined collection of objects; that is, it is defined in such a manner that we can determine for any given object whether or not belongs to the set. The objects that belong to a set are called its or . We will denote sets by capital letters, such as or if is an element of the set we write
A set is usually specified either by listing all of its elements inside a pair of braces or by stating the property that determines whether or not an object belongs to the set. We might write
for a set containing elements or
if each in satisfies a certain property For example, if is the set of even positive integers, we can describe by writing either
We write when we want to say that 2 is in the set and to say that is not in the set
Some of the more important sets that we will consider are the following:
We can find various relations between sets as well as perform operations on sets. A set is a of written or if every element of is also an element of For example,
and
Trivially, every set is a subset of itself. A set is a of a set if but If is not a subset of we write for example, Two sets are , written if we can show that and
It is convenient to have a set with no elements in it. This set is called the and is denoted by Note that the empty set is a subset of every set.
To construct new sets out of old sets, we can perform certain operations: the of two sets and is defined as
the of and is defined by
If and then
We can consider the union and the intersection of more than two sets. In this case we write
and
for the union and intersection, respectively, of the sets
When two sets have no elements in common, they are said to be ; for example, if is the set of even integers and is the set of odd integers, then and are disjoint. Two sets and are disjoint exactly when
Sometimes we will work within one fixed set called the . For any set we define the of denoted by to be the set
We define the of two sets and to be
Let be the universal set and suppose that
Then
Let and be sets. Then
and
and
and
and
We will prove (1) and (3) and leave the remaining results to be proven in the exercises.
(1) Observe that
and
Also,
(3) For sets and
A similar argument proves that
Let and be sets. Then
(1) If then the theorem follows immediately since both and are the empty set. Otherwise, we must show that and Let Then So is neither in nor in by the definition of the union of sets. By the definition of the complement, and Therefore, and we have
To show the reverse inclusion, suppose that Then and and so and Thus and so Hence, and so
The proof of (2) is left as an exercise.
Other relations between sets often hold true. For example,
To see that this is true, observe that
Given sets and we can define a new set called the of and as a set of ordered pairs. That is,
If and then is the set
and
We define the to be
If we often write for (where would be written times). For example, the set consists of all of 3-tuples of real numbers.
Subsets of are called . We will define a or from a set to a set to be the special type of relation where if for every element there exists a unique element Another way of saying this is that for every element in assigns a unique element in We usually write or Instead of writing down ordered pairs we write or The set is called the of and
is called the or of We can think of the elements in the function's domain as input values and the elements in the function's range as output values.
Suppose and In Figure 1.6 we define relations and from to The relation is a mapping, but is not because is not assigned to a unique element in that is, and
Given a function it is often possible to write a list describing what the function does to each specific element in the domain. However, not all functions can be described in this manner. For example, the function that sends each real number to its cube is a mapping that must be described by writing or
Consider the relation given by We know that but is or 2? This relation cannot be a mapping because it is not well-defined. A relation is if each element in the domain is assigned to a unique element in the range.
If is a map and the image of is i.e., then is said to be or . In other words, if there exists an for each such that then is onto. A map is or if implies Equivalently, a function is one-to-one if implies A map that is both one-to-one and onto is called .
Let be defined by Then is one-to-one but not onto. Define by where is a rational number expressed in its lowest terms with a positive denominator. The function is onto but not one-to-one.
Given two functions, we can construct a new function by using the range of the first function as the domain of the second function. Let and be mappings. Define a new map, the of and from to by
Let and Then
and
In general, order makes a difference; that is, in most cases
Sometimes it is the case that Let and Then
and
Given a matrix
we can define a map by
for in This is actually matrix multiplication; that is,
Maps from to given by matrices are called or .
Suppose that Define a map by
This is a bijective map. An alternative way to write is
For any set a one-to-one and onto mapping is called a of
Let and Then
The composition of mappings is associative; that is,
If and are both one-to-one, then the mapping is one-to-one;
If and are both onto, then the mapping is onto;
If and are bijective, then so is
We will prove (1) and (3). Part (2) is left as an exercise. Part (4) follows directly from (2) and (3).
(1) We must show that
For we have
(3) Assume that and are both onto functions. Given we must show that there exists an such that However, since is onto, there is an element such that Similarly, there is an such that Accordingly,
If is any set, we will use or to denote the from to itself. Define this map by for all A map is an of if and in other words, the inverse function of a function simply “undoes” the function. A map is said to be if it has an inverse. We usually write for the inverse of
The function has inverse by Example 1.12.
The natural logarithm and the exponential functions, and are inverses of each other provided that we are careful about choosing domains. Observe that
and
whenever composition makes sense.
Suppose that
Then defines a map from to by
We can find an inverse map of by simply inverting the matrix that is, In this example,
hence, the inverse map is given by
It is easy to check that
Not every map has an inverse. If we consider the map
given by the matrix
then an inverse map would have to be of the form
and
for all and Clearly this is impossible because might not be 0.
Given the permutation
on it is easy to see that the permutation defined by
is the inverse of In fact, any bijective mapping possesses an inverse, as we will see in the next theorem.
A mapping is invertible if and only if it is both one-to-one and onto.
Suppose first that is invertible with inverse Then is the identity map; that is, If with then Consequently, is one-to-one. Now suppose that To show that is onto, it is necessary to find an such that but with Let
Conversely, let be bijective and let Since is onto, there exists an such that Because is one-to-one, must be unique. Define by letting We have now constructed the inverse of
A fundamental notion in mathematics is that of equality. We can generalize equality with equivalence relations and equivalence classes. An on a set is a relation such that
for all ();
implies ();
and imply ().
Given an equivalence relation on a set we usually write instead of If the equivalence relation already has an associated notation such as or we will use that notation.
Let and be integers, where and are nonzero. Define if Clearly is reflexive and symmetric. To show that it is also transitive, suppose that and with and all nonzero. Then and Therefore,
Since Consequently,
Suppose that and are differentiable functions on We can define an equivalence relation on such functions by letting if It is clear that is both reflexive and symmetric. To demonstrate transitivity, suppose that and From calculus we know that and where and are both constants. Hence,
and Therefore,
For and in define if Then is an equivalence relation on
Let and be matrices with entries in the real numbers. We can define an equivalence relation on the set of matrices, by saying if there exists an invertible matrix such that For example, if
then since for
Let be the identity matrix; that is,
Then therefore, the relation is reflexive. To show symmetry, suppose that Then there exists an invertible matrix such that So
Finally, suppose that and Then there exist invertible matrices and such that and Since
the relation is transitive. Two matrices that are equivalent in this manner are said to be .
A of a set is a collection of nonempty sets such that for and Let be an equivalence relation on a set and let Then is called the of We will see that an equivalence relation gives rise to a partition via equivalence classes. Also, whenever a partition of a set exists, there is some natural underlying equivalence relation, as the following theorem demonstrates.
Given an equivalence relation on a set the equivalence classes of form a partition of Conversely, if is a partition of a set then there is an equivalence relation on with equivalence classes
Suppose there exists an equivalence relation on the set For any the reflexive property shows that and so is nonempty. Clearly Now let We need to show that either or Suppose that the intersection of and is not empty and that Then and By symmetry and transitivity hence, Similarly, and so Therefore, any two equivalence classes are either disjoint or exactly the same.
Conversely, suppose that is a partition of a set Let two elements be equivalent if they are in the same partition. Clearly, the relation is reflexive. If is in the same partition as then is in the same partition as so implies Finally, if is in the same partition as and is in the same partition as then must be in the same partition as and transitivity holds.
Two equivalence classes of an equivalence relation are either disjoint or equal.
Let us examine some of the partitions given by the equivalence classes in the last set of examples.
In the equivalence relation in Example 1.21, two pairs of integers, and are in the same equivalence class when they reduce to the same fraction in its lowest terms.
In the equivalence relation in Example 1.22, two functions and are in the same partition when they differ by a constant.
We defined an equivalence class on by if Two pairs of real numbers are in the same partition when they lie on the same circle about the origin.
Let and be two integers and suppose that We say that is to or is congruent to mod if is evenly divisible by that is, for some In this case we write For example, since is divisible by 8. We claim that congruence modulo forms an equivalence relation of Certainly any integer is equivalent to itself since is divisible by We will now show that the relation is symmetric. If then is divisible by So is divisible by and Now suppose that and Then there exist integers and such that and To show transitivity, it is necessary to prove that is divisible by However,
and so is divisible by
If we consider the equivalence relation established by the integers modulo 3, then
Notice that and also that the sets are disjoint. The sets and form a partition of the integers.
The integers modulo are a very important example in the study of abstract algebra and will become quite useful in our investigation of various algebraic structures such as groups and rings. In our discussion of the integers modulo we have actually assumed a result known as the division algorithm, which will be stated and proved in Chapter 2.