If $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then $A, B$, and $C$ must be pairwise disjoint

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
Let A, B, and C be finite sets. Prove or disprove:
If $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then $A, B$, and $C$ must be pairwise disjoint.
I started with inclusion-exclusion formula
$$|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| + |A cap B cap C|$$
Hypothesis says if $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then expression $|A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| $, must be equal to zero. So, we have
$$ |A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| = 0$$
$$ |A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| tag1$$
Now, I am not sure how finish this proof. I found two ways, but I do not know if are correct.
First way
If $x in |A cap B cap C|$, then $x in |A cap B| wedge xin |A cap C| wedge x in |B cap C|$.
So if we count the cardinality of $|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$, then if $x in |A cap B cap C|$ then $x$ is counted once but on RHS $x$ is counted three times. Thus the equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
Second way
From inclusion-exclusion formula, I know $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C |$$
I substitute in equation (1)
$$ -|A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C | = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$$
The expression $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ cancels out.
$$ |A| + |B| + |C| + |A cup B cup C | = 0$$
And this equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
My question is which way is correct and better or if there is a different method to prove the proposition. Thank you. (I am self-studying student, who is reading a textbook about discrete mathematics).
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
Let A, B, and C be finite sets. Prove or disprove:
If $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then $A, B$, and $C$ must be pairwise disjoint.
I started with inclusion-exclusion formula
$$|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| + |A cap B cap C|$$
Hypothesis says if $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then expression $|A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| $, must be equal to zero. So, we have
$$ |A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| = 0$$
$$ |A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| tag1$$
Now, I am not sure how finish this proof. I found two ways, but I do not know if are correct.
First way
If $x in |A cap B cap C|$, then $x in |A cap B| wedge xin |A cap C| wedge x in |B cap C|$.
So if we count the cardinality of $|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$, then if $x in |A cap B cap C|$ then $x$ is counted once but on RHS $x$ is counted three times. Thus the equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
Second way
From inclusion-exclusion formula, I know $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C |$$
I substitute in equation (1)
$$ -|A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C | = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$$
The expression $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ cancels out.
$$ |A| + |B| + |C| + |A cup B cup C | = 0$$
And this equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
My question is which way is correct and better or if there is a different method to prove the proposition. Thank you. (I am self-studying student, who is reading a textbook about discrete mathematics).
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
The first approach is incomplete. You did not consider the case where $Acap Bcap C$ is empty, whilst $Acap B$ is not.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:09
The second approach is incorrect. You got a wrong formula for the Principle of Inclusion and Exclusion and should at the end simply obtain $|Acup Bcup C|-|A|-|B|-|C|=0$ (so, you proved nothing here). See answers below for correct approaches.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:11
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
Let A, B, and C be finite sets. Prove or disprove:
If $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then $A, B$, and $C$ must be pairwise disjoint.
I started with inclusion-exclusion formula
$$|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| + |A cap B cap C|$$
Hypothesis says if $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then expression $|A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| $, must be equal to zero. So, we have
$$ |A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| = 0$$
$$ |A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| tag1$$
Now, I am not sure how finish this proof. I found two ways, but I do not know if are correct.
First way
If $x in |A cap B cap C|$, then $x in |A cap B| wedge xin |A cap C| wedge x in |B cap C|$.
So if we count the cardinality of $|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$, then if $x in |A cap B cap C|$ then $x$ is counted once but on RHS $x$ is counted three times. Thus the equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
Second way
From inclusion-exclusion formula, I know $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C |$$
I substitute in equation (1)
$$ -|A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C | = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$$
The expression $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ cancels out.
$$ |A| + |B| + |C| + |A cup B cup C | = 0$$
And this equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
My question is which way is correct and better or if there is a different method to prove the proposition. Thank you. (I am self-studying student, who is reading a textbook about discrete mathematics).
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
Let A, B, and C be finite sets. Prove or disprove:
If $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then $A, B$, and $C$ must be pairwise disjoint.
I started with inclusion-exclusion formula
$$|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| + |A cap B cap C|$$
Hypothesis says if $|A cup B cup C | = |A| + |B| + |C|$, then expression $|A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| $, must be equal to zero. So, we have
$$ |A cap B cap C| - |A cap B| - |A cap C| - |B cap C| = 0$$
$$ |A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| tag1$$
Now, I am not sure how finish this proof. I found two ways, but I do not know if are correct.
First way
If $x in |A cap B cap C|$, then $x in |A cap B| wedge xin |A cap C| wedge x in |B cap C|$.
So if we count the cardinality of $|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$, then if $x in |A cap B cap C|$ then $x$ is counted once but on RHS $x$ is counted three times. Thus the equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
Second way
From inclusion-exclusion formula, I know $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C |$$
I substitute in equation (1)
$$ -|A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| - |A cup B cup C | = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$$
The expression $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ cancels out.
$$ |A| + |B| + |C| + |A cup B cup C | = 0$$
And this equation is true if $A = B = C = emptyset$.
Therefore $A, B,$ and $C$ are pairwise disjoint.
My question is which way is correct and better or if there is a different method to prove the proposition. Thank you. (I am self-studying student, who is reading a textbook about discrete mathematics).
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
edited Aug 17 at 22:54
amWhy
190k25220433
190k25220433
asked Aug 17 at 22:44
Kapur
463
463
The first approach is incomplete. You did not consider the case where $Acap Bcap C$ is empty, whilst $Acap B$ is not.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:09
The second approach is incorrect. You got a wrong formula for the Principle of Inclusion and Exclusion and should at the end simply obtain $|Acup Bcup C|-|A|-|B|-|C|=0$ (so, you proved nothing here). See answers below for correct approaches.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:11
add a comment |Â
The first approach is incomplete. You did not consider the case where $Acap Bcap C$ is empty, whilst $Acap B$ is not.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:09
The second approach is incorrect. You got a wrong formula for the Principle of Inclusion and Exclusion and should at the end simply obtain $|Acup Bcup C|-|A|-|B|-|C|=0$ (so, you proved nothing here). See answers below for correct approaches.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:11
The first approach is incomplete. You did not consider the case where $Acap Bcap C$ is empty, whilst $Acap B$ is not.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:09
The first approach is incomplete. You did not consider the case where $Acap Bcap C$ is empty, whilst $Acap B$ is not.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:09
The second approach is incorrect. You got a wrong formula for the Principle of Inclusion and Exclusion and should at the end simply obtain $|Acup Bcup C|-|A|-|B|-|C|=0$ (so, you proved nothing here). See answers below for correct approaches.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:11
The second approach is incorrect. You got a wrong formula for the Principle of Inclusion and Exclusion and should at the end simply obtain $|Acup Bcup C|-|A|-|B|-|C|=0$ (so, you proved nothing here). See answers below for correct approaches.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:11
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
- Your first way is correct unless $A cap B cap C=emptyset.$
- The equation in your second way has to be corrected as $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| + |A cup B cup C |$$ and substituting this leads to a nothing (as you use the same equation twice).
This is how I would answer this question (using inclusion-exclusion principal):
$A cap B cap Csubset A cap B$ and therefore $|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B|, |A cap C|, |B cap C|.$
Then we have
$$3|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|.$$ Now combining this with what you have already found $$|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|,$$ we can say $$|A cap B| =|A cap C| = |B cap C|=|A cap B cap C|=0 .$$
2
Could you comment on the asker's work?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@Bumblebee In which case is first way correct unless $A cap B cap C = emptyset$? So, we substitute and get $3(|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| ) leq |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ and this is have only one solution if $|A cap B| = |A cap C| = |B cap C| = 0$, then $|A cap B cap C| = 0$. Therefore A,B, and C are pairwise dosjoint. Am I correct?
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:35
@Kapur: If $A cap B cap C = emptyset,$ then you can not take an element $x$ from that. Therefore you have to consider that possibility separately.
â Bumblebee
Aug 17 at 23:40
@Bumblebee: So I have to suppose $x in A$, then $x in B$, then $x in C$, then $x in A cap B$ and so on, until $x in A cap B cap C$ , together 8 possibilities? I know, this approach is not good, but i want find my mistake.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:57
You don't need to consider cases here. If $A cap B cap C = emptyset$ then your first equation immediately give you $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|=0$ which proves the pairwise disjointedness.
â Bumblebee
Aug 18 at 0:00
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
3
down vote
Suppose $A$, $B$, $C$ are not pairwise disjoint. Then the intersection of two of them, wlog $A$ and $B$, is nonempty. Now $|A cup B| = |A| + |B| - |A cap B| < |A| + |B|$,
and $|A cup B cup C| le |A cup B| + |C| < |A| + |B| + |C|$.
3
Could you comment also in your answer on the asker's work in the question?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@RobertIsrael Thank you. I know about contradiction a litle bit, but in the book what I'm reading is this topic after this example. So i prefer directly proof, but i get it, and it's easier than directly proof.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:51
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
- Your first way is correct unless $A cap B cap C=emptyset.$
- The equation in your second way has to be corrected as $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| + |A cup B cup C |$$ and substituting this leads to a nothing (as you use the same equation twice).
This is how I would answer this question (using inclusion-exclusion principal):
$A cap B cap Csubset A cap B$ and therefore $|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B|, |A cap C|, |B cap C|.$
Then we have
$$3|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|.$$ Now combining this with what you have already found $$|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|,$$ we can say $$|A cap B| =|A cap C| = |B cap C|=|A cap B cap C|=0 .$$
2
Could you comment on the asker's work?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@Bumblebee In which case is first way correct unless $A cap B cap C = emptyset$? So, we substitute and get $3(|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| ) leq |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ and this is have only one solution if $|A cap B| = |A cap C| = |B cap C| = 0$, then $|A cap B cap C| = 0$. Therefore A,B, and C are pairwise dosjoint. Am I correct?
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:35
@Kapur: If $A cap B cap C = emptyset,$ then you can not take an element $x$ from that. Therefore you have to consider that possibility separately.
â Bumblebee
Aug 17 at 23:40
@Bumblebee: So I have to suppose $x in A$, then $x in B$, then $x in C$, then $x in A cap B$ and so on, until $x in A cap B cap C$ , together 8 possibilities? I know, this approach is not good, but i want find my mistake.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:57
You don't need to consider cases here. If $A cap B cap C = emptyset$ then your first equation immediately give you $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|=0$ which proves the pairwise disjointedness.
â Bumblebee
Aug 18 at 0:00
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
- Your first way is correct unless $A cap B cap C=emptyset.$
- The equation in your second way has to be corrected as $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| + |A cup B cup C |$$ and substituting this leads to a nothing (as you use the same equation twice).
This is how I would answer this question (using inclusion-exclusion principal):
$A cap B cap Csubset A cap B$ and therefore $|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B|, |A cap C|, |B cap C|.$
Then we have
$$3|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|.$$ Now combining this with what you have already found $$|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|,$$ we can say $$|A cap B| =|A cap C| = |B cap C|=|A cap B cap C|=0 .$$
2
Could you comment on the asker's work?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@Bumblebee In which case is first way correct unless $A cap B cap C = emptyset$? So, we substitute and get $3(|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| ) leq |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ and this is have only one solution if $|A cap B| = |A cap C| = |B cap C| = 0$, then $|A cap B cap C| = 0$. Therefore A,B, and C are pairwise dosjoint. Am I correct?
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:35
@Kapur: If $A cap B cap C = emptyset,$ then you can not take an element $x$ from that. Therefore you have to consider that possibility separately.
â Bumblebee
Aug 17 at 23:40
@Bumblebee: So I have to suppose $x in A$, then $x in B$, then $x in C$, then $x in A cap B$ and so on, until $x in A cap B cap C$ , together 8 possibilities? I know, this approach is not good, but i want find my mistake.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:57
You don't need to consider cases here. If $A cap B cap C = emptyset$ then your first equation immediately give you $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|=0$ which proves the pairwise disjointedness.
â Bumblebee
Aug 18 at 0:00
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
- Your first way is correct unless $A cap B cap C=emptyset.$
- The equation in your second way has to be corrected as $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| + |A cup B cup C |$$ and substituting this leads to a nothing (as you use the same equation twice).
This is how I would answer this question (using inclusion-exclusion principal):
$A cap B cap Csubset A cap B$ and therefore $|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B|, |A cap C|, |B cap C|.$
Then we have
$$3|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|.$$ Now combining this with what you have already found $$|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|,$$ we can say $$|A cap B| =|A cap C| = |B cap C|=|A cap B cap C|=0 .$$
- Your first way is correct unless $A cap B cap C=emptyset.$
- The equation in your second way has to be corrected as $$|A cap B cap C| = - |A| - |B| - |C| + |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| + |A cup B cup C |$$ and substituting this leads to a nothing (as you use the same equation twice).
This is how I would answer this question (using inclusion-exclusion principal):
$A cap B cap Csubset A cap B$ and therefore $|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B|, |A cap C|, |B cap C|.$
Then we have
$$3|A cap B cap C| le |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|.$$ Now combining this with what you have already found $$|A cap B cap C| = |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|,$$ we can say $$|A cap B| =|A cap C| = |B cap C|=|A cap B cap C|=0 .$$
edited Aug 17 at 23:14
answered Aug 17 at 22:52
Bumblebee
9,45012449
9,45012449
2
Could you comment on the asker's work?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@Bumblebee In which case is first way correct unless $A cap B cap C = emptyset$? So, we substitute and get $3(|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| ) leq |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ and this is have only one solution if $|A cap B| = |A cap C| = |B cap C| = 0$, then $|A cap B cap C| = 0$. Therefore A,B, and C are pairwise dosjoint. Am I correct?
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:35
@Kapur: If $A cap B cap C = emptyset,$ then you can not take an element $x$ from that. Therefore you have to consider that possibility separately.
â Bumblebee
Aug 17 at 23:40
@Bumblebee: So I have to suppose $x in A$, then $x in B$, then $x in C$, then $x in A cap B$ and so on, until $x in A cap B cap C$ , together 8 possibilities? I know, this approach is not good, but i want find my mistake.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:57
You don't need to consider cases here. If $A cap B cap C = emptyset$ then your first equation immediately give you $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|=0$ which proves the pairwise disjointedness.
â Bumblebee
Aug 18 at 0:00
 |Â
show 1 more comment
2
Could you comment on the asker's work?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@Bumblebee In which case is first way correct unless $A cap B cap C = emptyset$? So, we substitute and get $3(|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| ) leq |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ and this is have only one solution if $|A cap B| = |A cap C| = |B cap C| = 0$, then $|A cap B cap C| = 0$. Therefore A,B, and C are pairwise dosjoint. Am I correct?
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:35
@Kapur: If $A cap B cap C = emptyset,$ then you can not take an element $x$ from that. Therefore you have to consider that possibility separately.
â Bumblebee
Aug 17 at 23:40
@Bumblebee: So I have to suppose $x in A$, then $x in B$, then $x in C$, then $x in A cap B$ and so on, until $x in A cap B cap C$ , together 8 possibilities? I know, this approach is not good, but i want find my mistake.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:57
You don't need to consider cases here. If $A cap B cap C = emptyset$ then your first equation immediately give you $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|=0$ which proves the pairwise disjointedness.
â Bumblebee
Aug 18 at 0:00
2
2
Could you comment on the asker's work?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
Could you comment on the asker's work?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@Bumblebee In which case is first way correct unless $A cap B cap C = emptyset$? So, we substitute and get $3(|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| ) leq |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ and this is have only one solution if $|A cap B| = |A cap C| = |B cap C| = 0$, then $|A cap B cap C| = 0$. Therefore A,B, and C are pairwise dosjoint. Am I correct?
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:35
@Bumblebee In which case is first way correct unless $A cap B cap C = emptyset$? So, we substitute and get $3(|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C| ) leq |A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|$ and this is have only one solution if $|A cap B| = |A cap C| = |B cap C| = 0$, then $|A cap B cap C| = 0$. Therefore A,B, and C are pairwise dosjoint. Am I correct?
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:35
@Kapur: If $A cap B cap C = emptyset,$ then you can not take an element $x$ from that. Therefore you have to consider that possibility separately.
â Bumblebee
Aug 17 at 23:40
@Kapur: If $A cap B cap C = emptyset,$ then you can not take an element $x$ from that. Therefore you have to consider that possibility separately.
â Bumblebee
Aug 17 at 23:40
@Bumblebee: So I have to suppose $x in A$, then $x in B$, then $x in C$, then $x in A cap B$ and so on, until $x in A cap B cap C$ , together 8 possibilities? I know, this approach is not good, but i want find my mistake.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:57
@Bumblebee: So I have to suppose $x in A$, then $x in B$, then $x in C$, then $x in A cap B$ and so on, until $x in A cap B cap C$ , together 8 possibilities? I know, this approach is not good, but i want find my mistake.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:57
You don't need to consider cases here. If $A cap B cap C = emptyset$ then your first equation immediately give you $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|=0$ which proves the pairwise disjointedness.
â Bumblebee
Aug 18 at 0:00
You don't need to consider cases here. If $A cap B cap C = emptyset$ then your first equation immediately give you $|A cap B| + |A cap C| + |B cap C|=0$ which proves the pairwise disjointedness.
â Bumblebee
Aug 18 at 0:00
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
3
down vote
Suppose $A$, $B$, $C$ are not pairwise disjoint. Then the intersection of two of them, wlog $A$ and $B$, is nonempty. Now $|A cup B| = |A| + |B| - |A cap B| < |A| + |B|$,
and $|A cup B cup C| le |A cup B| + |C| < |A| + |B| + |C|$.
3
Could you comment also in your answer on the asker's work in the question?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@RobertIsrael Thank you. I know about contradiction a litle bit, but in the book what I'm reading is this topic after this example. So i prefer directly proof, but i get it, and it's easier than directly proof.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:51
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Suppose $A$, $B$, $C$ are not pairwise disjoint. Then the intersection of two of them, wlog $A$ and $B$, is nonempty. Now $|A cup B| = |A| + |B| - |A cap B| < |A| + |B|$,
and $|A cup B cup C| le |A cup B| + |C| < |A| + |B| + |C|$.
3
Could you comment also in your answer on the asker's work in the question?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@RobertIsrael Thank you. I know about contradiction a litle bit, but in the book what I'm reading is this topic after this example. So i prefer directly proof, but i get it, and it's easier than directly proof.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:51
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Suppose $A$, $B$, $C$ are not pairwise disjoint. Then the intersection of two of them, wlog $A$ and $B$, is nonempty. Now $|A cup B| = |A| + |B| - |A cap B| < |A| + |B|$,
and $|A cup B cup C| le |A cup B| + |C| < |A| + |B| + |C|$.
Suppose $A$, $B$, $C$ are not pairwise disjoint. Then the intersection of two of them, wlog $A$ and $B$, is nonempty. Now $|A cup B| = |A| + |B| - |A cap B| < |A| + |B|$,
and $|A cup B cup C| le |A cup B| + |C| < |A| + |B| + |C|$.
answered Aug 17 at 22:50
Robert Israel
305k22201443
305k22201443
3
Could you comment also in your answer on the asker's work in the question?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@RobertIsrael Thank you. I know about contradiction a litle bit, but in the book what I'm reading is this topic after this example. So i prefer directly proof, but i get it, and it's easier than directly proof.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:51
add a comment |Â
3
Could you comment also in your answer on the asker's work in the question?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@RobertIsrael Thank you. I know about contradiction a litle bit, but in the book what I'm reading is this topic after this example. So i prefer directly proof, but i get it, and it's easier than directly proof.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:51
3
3
Could you comment also in your answer on the asker's work in the question?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
Could you comment also in your answer on the asker's work in the question?
â amWhy
Aug 17 at 22:56
@RobertIsrael Thank you. I know about contradiction a litle bit, but in the book what I'm reading is this topic after this example. So i prefer directly proof, but i get it, and it's easier than directly proof.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:51
@RobertIsrael Thank you. I know about contradiction a litle bit, but in the book what I'm reading is this topic after this example. So i prefer directly proof, but i get it, and it's easier than directly proof.
â Kapur
Aug 17 at 23:51
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2886259%2fif-a-cup-b-cup-c-a-b-c-then-a-b-and-c-must-be-pairwise%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
The first approach is incomplete. You did not consider the case where $Acap Bcap C$ is empty, whilst $Acap B$ is not.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:09
The second approach is incorrect. You got a wrong formula for the Principle of Inclusion and Exclusion and should at the end simply obtain $|Acup Bcup C|-|A|-|B|-|C|=0$ (so, you proved nothing here). See answers below for correct approaches.
â Batominovski
Aug 17 at 23:11