Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Consider I have two sets that neither one is a subset of the other (for example, the set of prime numbers and the set of odd integers). Is there a specific notation that combines the meanings of both ⊄ and ⊅ ?

Also, is there a notation to mean that two sets are completely distinct and share no elements in common (for example, the sets of odd and even integers)?

≠ seems very inappropriate, and I'd like to avoid it.

Context: My area is actually Computer Science. I'm using this refine my vocabulary in order to teach my students about subnetting (which is basically about sets and subsets of IP addresses), and to write some exercises for them. I'll probably use the words incomparable and disjoint as suggested.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

No, there is no special symbol to denote the situation in which neither set is contained in the other. There is a special word, though: we say the two sets are incomparable.

There is also no special symbol to denote the fact that two sets are disjoint; we simply write $A\cap B=\emptyset$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Let $\rm\:P\: $ be a poset = partially-ordered set, i.e. a set equipped wth a relation $\rm\le$ that is reflexive, antisymmetric and transitive. Then one says that $\rm\: x\: $ and $\rm\: y\: $ are comparable$\ $ if $\rm\ x \le y\ $ or $\rm\ y \le x\:;\: $ otherwise they are incomparable, sometimes written $\rm\ x||y\:.\:$ A chain$\ $ of $\rm\: P\:$ is a subset in which every two elements are comparable, and dually, an antichain$\ $ is a subset in which every two elements are incomparable.

share|cite|improve this answer
(@Juliano: any collection of sets is a poset under the subset relation, which is why this terminology is applicable.) – Paul VanKoughnett Oct 11 '10 at 21:02

Not an answer, perhaps an interesting historical curiousity. George Mackey (my professor years ago) hoped to popularize this symbol as a binary relation for disjoint sets:

enter image description here

I think he meant it as a lower case "d" drawn symmetrically.

The screen shot suggests that $\TeX$ doesn't know it.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.