Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Consider the following operation on cardinalities. Given sets A,B write |A|-|B|=|A-B|.

Prove that this notion of difference of cardinalities is not well-defined.

Proof:

To Prove that |A|-|B|=|A-B| is not well-defined we will give counter example.

To begin with;

Let A={a,b,c,d,e} and B={h,i,j}

From the above, it is clearly seen that |A|=5 and |B|=3

If we consider the Left Hand Side:

|A|-|B|=5

Now consider the Right Hand Side:

|A-B|=2

Since there is no bijection between |A|-|B| and |A-B|, it is then concluded that the notion of difference of cardinalities is not well-defined.

Can anyone correct me on this please!!!

share|improve this question
3  
The idea’s fine, but you have them backwards: $|A|-|B|=5-3=2$, and $|A\setminus B|=|A|=5$. –  Brian M. Scott Feb 7 '13 at 1:21
    
thankx @Brian M. Scott –  Timoci Lagilevu Feb 7 '13 at 1:37
1  
@BrianM.Scott I must disagree here. –  Ittay Weiss Feb 7 '13 at 1:41
    
@Ittay: It’s fine as far as it goes; it just doesn’t go far enough. I was urgently called away and left the comment unfinished. I’d intended to add the necessity of looking at a $B$ like $\{a,b,c\}$, say, but by the time I got back, you’d answered, so I didn’t bother. –  Brian M. Scott Feb 7 '13 at 1:47
    
I figured something of the sort, but just did not want the unfinished comment to throw the unsuspecting off... –  Ittay Weiss Feb 7 '13 at 1:54

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

To show that the notion given is not well defined you have to do the following: Find four sets $A,B,C,D$ such that $|A|=|B|$ and $|C|=|D|$ while $|A|-|C|\ne |B|-|D|$. In your answer above you did not do that. Moreover, your claim that "there is no bijection between $|A|-|B|$ and $|A-B|$" is wrong since the notion of difference you are considering says explicitly that $|A|-|B|$ is $|A-B|$.

You need to work with the notion of equality of cardinalities whereby $|X|=|Y|$ precisely when there exists a bijection $X\to Y$, and not rely on your existing intuition regarding counting finite sets. Again, you can present your counter example by exhibiting four sets as I explained above.

EDIT: To clarify what I mean then: A source of confusion about such questions is to think that one shows the notion not to be well-defined if one shows that notion does not agree with ordinary counting. That is a wrong conclusion though and if one sticks to the precise definitions of cardinalities instead of reverting to counting then one avoids this pitfall. The reason the notion is ill-defined is not it's weird computational results but their inconsistency. For instance, defining $|A|-|B|=|\emptyset |$ is a well-defined notion. It gives weird results that to us have nothing to do with subtraction but it is a well-defined notion. The notion in the question though is not well-defined. Totally different.

share|improve this answer
1  
When you say not to "rely on your existing intuition regarding counting finite sets" this suggests that you think some of $A,B,C,D$ must be infinite. This isn't true with the OP's definition of subtraction: you can show it's ill-defined using finite sets. –  Trevor Wilson Feb 7 '13 at 1:42
1  
...for example, if $C$ and $D$ are nonempty and $C$ is a subset of $A$ but $D$ is not a subset of $B$. –  Trevor Wilson Feb 7 '13 at 1:44
1  
You are absolutely right @TrevorWilson, and I did not mean to produce a counter example with infinite set. I added a bit more text to, I hope, explain my comment. –  Ittay Weiss Feb 7 '13 at 1:48
1  
Ok, now it is clear---the definition of subtraction is bogus, so we can't expect it to be well-defined the way we would expect the better definition (the one where we set set being subtracted is a subset) to be. At first I thought you were alluding to the fact that even the better definition is ill-defined for infinite sets. –  Trevor Wilson Feb 7 '13 at 1:51

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.