|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
register |
bbs |
search |
rss |
faq |
about
|
 |
 |
meet up |
add to del.icio.us |
digg it
|
 |
 |
| Mad Scientists Science and Mathematics discussion-- theories, arguments, citations, proofs and pudding. |
 |
|
|
#1
 2008-11-02, 21:05
|
-AnEnima- 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Non-pictoral explanations of venn-diagrams
I'm faced with the question "Show by example that in general, A∩(B∪C) ≠ (A∩B)∪C." Now, a visual representation of this is easy enough, but I hate drawing venn diagrams.
I know that
(Y∪Z) = (x : x ∈ Y or x ∈ Z)
(Y∩Z) = (x : x ∈ Y and x ∈ Z)
So does that mean
A∩(B∪C) = (A∩B)∪(A∩C) = (x : (x ∈ A, x ∈ B) or (x ∈ A, x ∈ C))
(A∩B)∪C = (A∪C)∩(B∪C) = (x : (x ∈ A or x ∈ C), (x ∈ B or x ∈ C)
...?
Or am I just overcomplicating things?
|
|
#2
 2008-11-02, 22:14
|
|
|
Re: Non-pictoral explanations of venn-diagrams
You hate drawing two circles?
|
|
#3
 2008-11-02, 22:51
|
-AnEnima- 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Non-pictoral explanations of venn-diagrams
No, I just prefer the look of equations, as opposed to pictures. I just think they look silly and out of place amongst everything else. And these actually involve three circles.
|
|
#4
 2008-11-03, 04:38
|
Mantikore 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Non-pictoral explanations of venn-diagrams
to be honest, i have no idea how to do this kind of thing without venn diagrams. i also think that these "equations" are based of venn diagrams. they arent that hard anyway, even with 3 overlapping events
|
|
#5
 2008-11-03, 23:06
|
GordonFreemen 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Non-pictoral explanations of venn-diagrams
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by -AnEnima-
I'm faced with the question "Show by example that in general, A∩(B∪C) ≠ (A∩B)∪C." Now, a visual representation of this is easy enough, but I hate drawing venn diagrams.
I know that
(Y∪Z) = (x : x ∈ Y or x ∈ Z)
(Y∩Z) = (x : x ∈ Y and x ∈ Z)
So does that mean
A∩(B∪C) = (A∩B)∪(A∩C) = (x : (x ∈ A, x ∈ B) or (x ∈ A, x ∈ C))
(A∩B)∪C = (A∪C)∩(B∪C) = (x : (x ∈ A or x ∈ C), (x ∈ B or x ∈ C)
...?
Or am I just overcomplicating things?
|
They say show by way of example, in other words, they want you to come up with sets A,B and C that actually shows this to not be true. Think about it a little if you want, one answer is the following:
Take A = B = empty set, take C any nonempty set.
then B∪C = C, and A∩(B∪C) = empty, on the other hand,
A∩B = empty and (A∩B)∪C = C which we're assuming nonempty.
|
|
 |
 |
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.

totse.com certificate signatures
|
 |
 |
About | Community | Bad Ideas | Drugs | Ego | Erotica | Fringe | Society | Technology
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|