TheCoconutChef

45 reputation

	45 reputation	bio	website		visits	member for	10 months
3 badges		location			seen	Apr 25 at 13:24

11 Actions

Dec 30	comment	I shouldn't be able to prove the power-set of union is equal to union of power-sets. Thanks. The absence of quantifier can be explained by the fact that this problem emerged in the context of Hamos' Naive Set Theory, which makes no use of quantifier and very little of first order logic. It was asked to prove that $P(A) \cup P(B) \subset P(A \cup B)$, and I decided to test the converse, which we aren't asked to do.
Dec 30	awarded	Supporter
Dec 30	accepted	I shouldn't be able to prove the power-set of union is equal to union of power-sets.
Dec 29	asked	I shouldn't be able to prove the power-set of union is equal to union of power-sets.
Jul 7	comment	Understanding this summation identity I guess that when manipulating new symbols (the Sigma notation isn't exactly new to me but it had never been center stage) their complete meaning isn't immediately apparent. I didn't see it concretely.
Jul 7	awarded	Scholar
Jul 7	accepted	Understanding this summation identity
Jul 7	comment	Understanding this summation identity Thanks. Quite helpful.
Jul 7	comment	Understanding this summation identity Didn't expect answers which would come as quickly and be as good. Thanks.
Jul 7	awarded	Student
Jul 7	asked	Understanding this summation identity