Set Theory Intersection

In set theory, the intersection of two sets A and B , denoted by A ∩ B , is the set containing all elements of A that also belong to B or equivalently, all elements of B that also belong to A .

Intersection
Set Theory Intersection
The intersection of two sets and represented by circles. is in red.
TypeSet operation
FieldSet theory
StatementThe intersection of and is the set of elements that lie in both set and set .
Symbolic statement

Notation and terminology

Intersection is written using the symbol "Set Theory Intersection " between the terms; that is, in infix notation. For example:

Set Theory Intersection 
Set Theory Intersection 
Set Theory Intersection 
Set Theory Intersection 
The intersection of more than two sets (generalized intersection) can be written as:
Set Theory Intersection 
which is similar to capital-sigma notation.

For an explanation of the symbols used in this article, refer to the table of mathematical symbols.

Definition

Set Theory Intersection 
Intersection of three sets:
Set Theory Intersection 
Set Theory Intersection 
Intersections of the unaccented modern Greek, Latin, and Cyrillic scripts, considering only the shapes of the letters and ignoring their pronunciation
Set Theory Intersection 
Example of an intersection with sets

The intersection of two sets Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  denoted by Set Theory Intersection , is the set of all objects that are members of both the sets Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  In symbols:

Set Theory Intersection 

That is, Set Theory Intersection  is an element of the intersection Set Theory Intersection  if and only if Set Theory Intersection  is both an element of Set Theory Intersection  and an element of Set Theory Intersection 

For example:

  • The intersection of the sets {1, 2, 3} and {2, 3, 4} is {2, 3}.
  • The number 9 is not in the intersection of the set of prime numbers {2, 3, 5, 7, 11, ...} and the set of odd numbers {1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, ...}, because 9 is not prime.

Intersecting and disjoint sets

We say that Set Theory Intersection  intersects (meets) Set Theory Intersection  if there exists some Set Theory Intersection  that is an element of both Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  in which case we also say that Set Theory Intersection  intersects (meets) Set Theory Intersection  at Set Theory Intersection . Equivalently, Set Theory Intersection  intersects Set Theory Intersection  if their intersection Set Theory Intersection  is an inhabited set, meaning that there exists some Set Theory Intersection  such that Set Theory Intersection 

We say that Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  are disjoint if Set Theory Intersection  does not intersect Set Theory Intersection  In plain language, they have no elements in common. Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  are disjoint if their intersection is empty, denoted Set Theory Intersection 

For example, the sets Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  are disjoint, while the set of even numbers intersects the set of multiples of 3 at the multiples of 6.

Algebraic properties

Binary intersection is an associative operation; that is, for any sets Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  one has

Set Theory Intersection 
Thus the parentheses may be omitted without ambiguity: either of the above can be written as Set Theory Intersection . Intersection is also commutative. That is, for any Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  one has
Set Theory Intersection 
The intersection of any set with the empty set results in the empty set; that is, that for any set Set Theory Intersection ,
Set Theory Intersection 
Also, the intersection operation is idempotent; that is, any set Set Theory Intersection  satisfies that Set Theory Intersection . All these properties follow from analogous facts about logical conjunction.

Intersection distributes over union and union distributes over intersection. That is, for any sets Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  one has

Set Theory Intersection 
Inside a universe Set Theory Intersection  one may define the complement Set Theory Intersection  of Set Theory Intersection  to be the set of all elements of Set Theory Intersection  not in Set Theory Intersection  Furthermore, the intersection of Set Theory Intersection  and Set Theory Intersection  may be written as the complement of the union of their complements, derived easily from De Morgan's laws:
Set Theory Intersection 

Arbitrary intersections

The most general notion is the intersection of an arbitrary nonempty collection of sets. If Set Theory Intersection  is a nonempty set whose elements are themselves sets, then Set Theory Intersection  is an element of the intersection of Set Theory Intersection  if and only if for every element Set Theory Intersection  of Set Theory Intersection  Set Theory Intersection  is an element of Set Theory Intersection  In symbols:

Set Theory Intersection 

The notation for this last concept can vary considerably. Set theorists will sometimes write "Set Theory Intersection ", while others will instead write "Set Theory Intersection ". The latter notation can be generalized to "Set Theory Intersection ", which refers to the intersection of the collection Set Theory Intersection  Here Set Theory Intersection  is a nonempty set, and Set Theory Intersection  is a set for every Set Theory Intersection 

In the case that the index set Set Theory Intersection  is the set of natural numbers, notation analogous to that of an infinite product may be seen:

Set Theory Intersection 

When formatting is difficult, this can also be written "Set Theory Intersection ". This last example, an intersection of countably many sets, is actually very common; for an example, see the article on σ-algebras.

Nullary intersection

Set Theory Intersection 
Conjunctions of the arguments in parentheses

The conjunction of no argument is the tautology (compare: empty product); accordingly the intersection of no set is the universe.

In the previous section, we excluded the case where Set Theory Intersection  was the empty set (Set Theory Intersection ). The reason is as follows: The intersection of the collection Set Theory Intersection  is defined as the set (see set-builder notation)

Set Theory Intersection 
If Set Theory Intersection  is empty, there are no sets Set Theory Intersection  in Set Theory Intersection  so the question becomes "which Set Theory Intersection 's satisfy the stated condition?" The answer seems to be every possible Set Theory Intersection . When Set Theory Intersection  is empty, the condition given above is an example of a vacuous truth. So the intersection of the empty family should be the universal set (the identity element for the operation of intersection), but in standard (ZF) set theory, the universal set does not exist.

However, when restricted to the context of subsets of a given fixed set Set Theory Intersection , the notion of the intersection of an empty collection of subsets of Set Theory Intersection  is well-defined. In that case, if Set Theory Intersection  is empty, its intersection is Set Theory Intersection . Since all Set Theory Intersection  vacuously satisfy the required condition, the intersection of the empty collection of subsets of Set Theory Intersection  is all of Set Theory Intersection  In formulas, Set Theory Intersection  This matches the intuition that as collections of subsets become smaller, their respective intersections become larger; in the extreme case, the empty collection has an intersection equal to the whole underlying set.

Also, in type theory Set Theory Intersection  is of a prescribed type Set Theory Intersection  so the intersection is understood to be of type Set Theory Intersection  (the type of sets whose elements are in Set Theory Intersection ), and we can define Set Theory Intersection  to be the universal set of Set Theory Intersection  (the set whose elements are exactly all terms of type Set Theory Intersection ).

See also

References

Further reading

  • Devlin, K. J. (1993). The Joy of Sets: Fundamentals of Contemporary Set Theory (Second ed.). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-94094-4.
  • Munkres, James R. (2000). "Set Theory and Logic". Topology (Second ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-181629-2.
  • Rosen, Kenneth (2007). "Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, Sequences, and Sums". Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications (Sixth ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-322972-0.

Tags:

Set Theory Intersection Notation and terminologySet Theory Intersection DefinitionSet Theory Intersection Algebraic propertiesSet Theory Intersection Arbitrary intersectionsSet Theory Intersection Nullary intersectionSet Theory Intersection Further readingSet Theory IntersectionSet (mathematics)Set theory

🔥 Trending searches on Wiki English:

Richard NixonTransformers OneTerence CrawfordDua LipaMichael JacksonRaukShia LaBeoufGeorge VIDawn of the Planet of the ApesSexual intercourseCharles IIIX-Men '97BBC World ServiceList of Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inducteesEva MendesBilly JoelRebel MoonIranNehal WadheraPatti SmithStephen CurryThailandWindows 10 version historyAnyone but YouKaren McDougalAnya Taylor-JoyNelson MandelaKim Soo-hyunHugh JackmanSanju SamsonArizona CoyotesARonald ReaganLuke NewtonGoogle MapsCharlize TheronFIFA World CupShaquille O'NealRichard Armitage (actor)Unit 731Olivia MunnTed BundyPortrait of JennieBarbie (film)Mark WahlbergPassengers (2016 film)BridgertonDouble or Nothing (2024)2024 NBA playoffsList of James Bond filmsLogan (film)Kathleen FerrierBlowing from a gunCosmo JarvisAnthony Edwards (basketball)Animal (2023 Indian film)Nicola CoughlanAbraham LincolnRúben AmorimWrestleMania XLBreathe (2024 film)Jake PaulRule 34Nava MauBade Miyan Chote Miyan (2024 film)Wrexham A.F.C.Georgia GuidestonesMidnightsMarie AntoinetteMark RobinsGeorgia (country)Elton JohnA Gentleman in Moscow (TV series)Sean CombsBlue Lights (2023 TV series)Poor Things (film)Quentin TarantinoThe Beekeeper (2024 film)🡆 More