Processing math: 100%

Another Set Equality Example

In this video, we're going to talk about a proof, but instead of well discovering it we're going to read a proof, that I had just written and then talk about it. So the statement that we're going to prove is the following:

Prove that AB=A(AB)

Proof

First we show that ABA(AB). Let xAB. Then xA and xB. By definition, x(AB). However, since xA and x(AB), we have that xA(AB).

Next, we show that A(AB)AB. Let xA(AB) By definition, this means that xA and x(AB) For x(AB) to be true, either xA (which we know is false) or xA and xB. Thus xA and xB and hence by definition, xAB.

Therefore, AB=A(AB)

So there is the proof, now let's talk about it.

Discussion of Proof

So again we have a proof involving set equalities, so in order to show this, we're going to first show that the left-hand set is contained inside the right-hand set, and then we'll show that the right-hand set is contained inside the left-hand set.

So first, we show that ABA(AB). So to do this, we start with an element from the left-hand set. Let xAB, and what does that mean? So now we unwind the definition, so if x is inside the intersection, then it must be inside both the sets, right? So then xA and xB.

By definition, what do we know? Well if xA and xB, then we know that $x\notin (A-B), right, because it's in the intersection.

So what does that tell us? Well however, we already know that xA inside A and we know that x(AB), and so by definition again we have that xA(AB). Again this is just definition pushing.

So you just have to remember what these definitions mean, right? AB means that each element of A is contained in B, and AB means that x is an element of A and x is not an element of B. That's what the set difference set is.

Now we try the reverse inclusion. So let xA(AB). By definition, we know that this means that xA and that x(AB). That is the definition of x belonging to this set.

Now the next question is for x(AB), what does that mean? Well this means one of two things, it either means that xA, in which case would be done, but we already know that's false so we know that this part can't be true, but there's an “or”, right? So either xA or xA and xB, right, because if it's inside both of these sets, then it's not in the set difference because it's common.

Since we know the first part is false, right, we already have that xA, what can we conclude? Well we conclude that the second part has to be true, so then thus xA and xB, and then hence, by definition, xAB.

That shows the reverse containment, so now we've shown the double containment, therefore the claimed statement is true. AB=A(AB)

Okay, hopefully this helped. Thank you very much.