id
stringlengths
11
15
title
stringlengths
7
171
problem
stringlengths
9
4.33k
solution
stringlengths
6
19k
problem_wikitext
stringlengths
9
4.42k
solution_wikitext
stringlengths
7
19.1k
proof_title
stringlengths
9
171
theorem_url
stringlengths
34
198
proof_url
stringlengths
36
198
categories
listlengths
0
9
theorem_references
listlengths
0
36
proof_references
listlengths
0
253
proofwiki-8400
Mapping Images are Disjoint only if Domains are Disjoint
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let: :$f \sqbrk S \cap f \sqbrk T = \O$ where $f \sqbrk S$ denotes the image set of $S$. Then: :$S \cap T = \O$
From Image of Intersection under Mapping: :$f \sqbrk {S \cap T} \subseteq f \sqbrk S \cap f \sqbrk T$ From Empty Set is Subset of All Sets: :$f \sqbrk {S \cap T} = \O$ From Image of Subset under Mapping is Subset of Image: :$S \cap T = \O$ {{qed}}
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let: :$f \sqbrk S \cap f \sqbrk T = \O$ where $f \sqbrk S$ denotes the [[Definition:Image Set of Mapping|image set]] of $S$. Then: :$S \cap T = \O$
From [[Image of Intersection under Mapping]]: :$f \sqbrk {S \cap T} \subseteq f \sqbrk S \cap f \sqbrk T$ From [[Empty Set is Subset of All Sets]]: :$f \sqbrk {S \cap T} = \O$ From [[Image of Subset under Mapping is Subset of Image]]: :$S \cap T = \O$ {{qed}}
Mapping Images are Disjoint only if Domains are Disjoint
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Mapping_Images_are_Disjoint_only_if_Domains_are_Disjoint
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Mapping_Images_are_Disjoint_only_if_Domains_are_Disjoint
[ "Images", "Disjoint Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Mapping" ]
[ "Image of Intersection under Mapping", "Empty Set is Subset of All Sets", "Image of Subset under Mapping is Subset of Image" ]
proofwiki-8401
Image of Relation is Domain of Inverse Relation
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. Let $\RR^{-1} \subseteq T \times S$ be the inverse of $\RR$. Then: :$\Img \RR = \Dom {\RR^{-1} }$ That is, the image of a relation is the domain of its inverse.
By definition: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \Img \RR | o = := | r = \set {t \in T: \exists s \in S: \tuple {s, t} \in \RR} }} {{eqn | l = \Dom {\RR^{-1} } | o = := | r = \set {t \in T: \exists s \in S: \tuple {t, s} \in \RR^{-1} } }} {{end-eqn}} {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in | r...
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. Let $\RR^{-1} \subseteq T \times S$ be the [[Definition:Inverse Relation|inverse of $\RR$]]. Then: :$\Img \RR = \Dom {\RR^{-1} }$ That is, the [[Definition:Image of Relation|image]] of a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] is the [[Definition:Domain...
By definition: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \Img \RR | o = := | r = \set {t \in T: \exists s \in S: \tuple {s, t} \in \RR} }} {{eqn | l = \Dom {\RR^{-1} } | o = := | r = \set {t \in T: \exists s \in S: \tuple {t, s} \in \RR^{-1} } }} {{end-eqn}} {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in |...
Image of Relation is Domain of Inverse Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Relation_is_Domain_of_Inverse_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Relation_is_Domain_of_Inverse_Relation
[ "Relation Theory", "Inverse Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Inverse Relation", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Relation/Relation", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Relation", "Definition:Inverse Relation" ]
[]
proofwiki-8402
Domain of Relation is Image of Inverse Relation
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. Let $\RR^{-1} \subseteq T \times S$ be the inverse of $\RR$. Then: :$\Dom \RR = \Img {\RR^{-1} }$ That is, the domain of a relation is the image of its inverse.
By definition: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \Dom \RR | o = := | r = \set {s \in S: \exists t \in T: \tuple {s, t} \in \RR} }} {{eqn | l = \Img {\RR^{-1} } | o = := | r = \set {s \in S: \exists T \in T: \tuple {t, s} \in \RR^{-1} } }} {{end-eqn}} {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in | r...
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. Let $\RR^{-1} \subseteq T \times S$ be the [[Definition:Inverse Relation|inverse of $\RR$]]. Then: :$\Dom \RR = \Img {\RR^{-1} }$ That is, the [[Definition:Domain of Relation|domain]] of a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] is the [[Definition:Imag...
By definition: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \Dom \RR | o = := | r = \set {s \in S: \exists t \in T: \tuple {s, t} \in \RR} }} {{eqn | l = \Img {\RR^{-1} } | o = := | r = \set {s \in S: \exists T \in T: \tuple {t, s} \in \RR^{-1} } }} {{end-eqn}} {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = x | o = \in |...
Domain of Relation is Image of Inverse Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Domain_of_Relation_is_Image_of_Inverse_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Domain_of_Relation_is_Image_of_Inverse_Relation
[ "Relation Theory", "Inverse Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Inverse Relation", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Relation", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Relation/Relation", "Definition:Inverse Relation" ]
[]
proofwiki-8403
Element in Preimage of Image under Mapping
Let $f: S \to T$ be a mapping. Let $f^{-1} \sqbrk {\map f x}$ denote the preimage of $\map f x$ under $f$. Then: :$\forall x \in S: x \in f^{-1} \sqbrk {\map f x}$
A mapping is by definition a left-total relation. Therefore Preimage of Image under Left-Total Relation is Superset applies: :$A \subseteq S \implies A \subseteq f^{-1} \sqbrk {f \sqbrk A}$ Thus: :$\set x \subseteq S \implies \set x \subseteq f^{-1} \sqbrk {f \sqbrk A}$ Hence the result. {{qed}}
Let $f: S \to T$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Let $f^{-1} \sqbrk {\map f x}$ denote the [[Definition:Preimage of Subset under Mapping|preimage]] of $\map f x$ under $f$. Then: :$\forall x \in S: x \in f^{-1} \sqbrk {\map f x}$
A [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] is by definition a [[Definition:Left-Total Relation|left-total relation]]. Therefore [[Preimage of Image under Left-Total Relation is Superset]] applies: :$A \subseteq S \implies A \subseteq f^{-1} \sqbrk {f \sqbrk A}$ Thus: :$\set x \subseteq S \implies \set x \subseteq f^{-1} \sqbrk...
Element in Preimage of Image under Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Element_in_Preimage_of_Image_under_Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Element_in_Preimage_of_Image_under_Mapping
[ "Preimages under Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Preimage/Mapping/Subset" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Left-Total Relation", "Preimage of Image under Left-Total Relation is Superset" ]
proofwiki-8404
Element in Image of Preimage under Mapping
Let $f: S \to T$ be a mapping. Then: :$\forall y \in T: \in f \sqbrk {f^{-1} \sqbrk y} = \set y$
A mapping is by definition a relation. Therefore {{Corollary|Image of Preimage under Mapping}} applies: :$B \subseteq \Img S \implies \paren {f \circ f^{-1} } \sqbrk B = B$ Thus: :$\set y \subseteq T \implies f^{-1} \sqbrk {f \sqbrk {\set y} } = \set y$ Hence the result. {{qed}}
Let $f: S \to T$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Then: :$\forall y \in T: \in f \sqbrk {f^{-1} \sqbrk y} = \set y$
A [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] is by definition a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. Therefore {{Corollary|Image of Preimage under Mapping}} applies: :$B \subseteq \Img S \implies \paren {f \circ f^{-1} } \sqbrk B = B$ Thus: :$\set y \subseteq T \implies f^{-1} \sqbrk {f \sqbrk {\set y} } = \set y$ Hence the result...
Element in Image of Preimage under Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Element_in_Image_of_Preimage_under_Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Element_in_Image_of_Preimage_under_Mapping
[ "Mapping Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Relation" ]
proofwiki-8405
Image of Set Difference under Injection
Let $f: S \to T$ be a mapping. Let $S_1$ and $S_2$ be subsets of $S$. Let $S_1 \setminus S_2$ denote the set difference between $S_1$ and $S_2$. Then: :$\forall S_1, S_2 \subseteq S: f \sqbrk {S_1} \setminus f \sqbrk {S_2} = f \sqbrk {S_1 \setminus S_2}$ {{iff}} $f$ is an injection.
An injection is a type of one-to-one relation, and therefore also a one-to-many relation. Therefore One-to-Many Image of Set Difference applies: :$\RR \sqbrk {S_1} \setminus \RR \sqbrk {S_2} = \RR \sqbrk {S_1 \setminus S_2}$ {{iff}} $\RR$ is one-to-many. We have that $f$ is a mapping and therefore a many-to-one relatio...
Let $f: S \to T$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Let $S_1$ and $S_2$ be [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] of $S$. Let $S_1 \setminus S_2$ denote the [[Definition:Set Difference|set difference]] between $S_1$ and $S_2$. Then: :$\forall S_1, S_2 \subseteq S: f \sqbrk {S_1} \setminus f \sqbrk {S_2} = f \sqbrk {S_1 \s...
An [[Definition:Injection|injection]] is a type of [[Definition:One-to-One Relation|one-to-one relation]], and therefore also a [[Definition:One-to-Many Relation|one-to-many relation]]. Therefore [[One-to-Many Image of Set Difference]] applies: :$\RR \sqbrk {S_1} \setminus \RR \sqbrk {S_2} = \RR \sqbrk {S_1 \setminus...
Image of Set Difference under Injection
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Set_Difference_under_Injection
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Set_Difference_under_Injection
[ "Set Difference", "Injections" ]
[ "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set Difference", "Definition:Injection" ]
[ "Definition:Injection", "Definition:One-to-One Relation", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation", "One-to-Many Image of Set Difference", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Many-to-One Relation", "Definition:One-to-Many Relation", "Definition:Injection", "Definition:Inj...
proofwiki-8406
De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Union
:$\ds \map \complement {\bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} = \bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} \map \complement {S_i}$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | r = \mathbb U \setminus \paren {\bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | c = {{Defof|Set Complement}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} \paren {\mathbb U \setminus S_i} | c = De Morgan's Laws for Set Difference: Difference wit...
:$\ds \map \complement {\bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} = \bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} \map \complement {S_i}$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | r = \mathbb U \setminus \paren {\bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | c = {{Defof|Set Complement}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} \paren {\mathbb U \setminus S_i} | c = [[De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Difference/Fami...
De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Union
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Set_Theory)/Set_Complement/Family_of_Sets/Complement_of_Union
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Set_Theory)/Set_Complement/Family_of_Sets/Complement_of_Union
[ "De Morgan's Laws", "Indexed Families" ]
[]
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Difference/Family of Sets/Difference with Union" ]
proofwiki-8407
De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Intersection
:$\ds \map \complement {\bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} = \bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} \map \complement {S_i}$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | r = \mathbb U \setminus \paren {\bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | c = {{Defof|Set Complement}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} \paren {\mathbb U \setminus S_i} | c = De Morgan's Laws for Set Difference: Difference wit...
:$\ds \map \complement {\bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} = \bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} \map \complement {S_i}$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | r = \mathbb U \setminus \paren {\bigcap_{i \mathop \in I} S_i} | c = {{Defof|Set Complement}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcup_{i \mathop \in I} \paren {\mathbb U \setminus S_i} | c = [[De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Difference/Fami...
De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Intersection
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Set_Theory)/Set_Complement/Family_of_Sets/Complement_of_Intersection
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_Laws_(Set_Theory)/Set_Complement/Family_of_Sets/Complement_of_Intersection
[ "De Morgan's Laws", "Indexed Families" ]
[]
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Difference/Family of Sets/Difference with Intersection" ]
proofwiki-8408
Limit of Sets Exists iff Limit Inferior contains Limit Superior
Let $\Bbb S = \set {E_n : n \in \N}$ be a sequence of sets. Then $\Bbb S$ converges to a limit {{iff}}: :$\ds \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n \subseteq \liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty}E_n$
=== Sufficient Condition === Let $\Bbb S$ converge to a limit. Then by definition: :$\ds \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n = \liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n$ and so by definition of set equality: :$\ds \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n \subseteq \liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty}E_n$ {{qed|lemma}}
Let $\Bbb S = \set {E_n : n \in \N}$ be a [[Definition:Sequence|sequence]] of [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Then $\Bbb S$ [[Definition:Limit of Sets|converges to a limit]] {{iff}}: :$\ds \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n \subseteq \liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty}E_n$
=== Sufficient Condition === Let $\Bbb S$ [[Definition:Limit of Sets|converge to a limit]]. Then by definition: :$\ds \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n = \liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n$ and so by definition of [[Definition:Set Equality/Definition 2|set equality]]: :$\ds \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} E_n \subset...
Limit of Sets Exists iff Limit Inferior contains Limit Superior
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Limit_of_Sets_Exists_iff_Limit_Inferior_contains_Limit_Superior
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Limit_of_Sets_Exists_iff_Limit_Inferior_contains_Limit_Superior
[ "Limits Superior of Set Sequences", "Limits Inferior of Set Sequences" ]
[ "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Limit of Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Limit of Sets", "Definition:Set Equality/Definition 2", "Definition:Limit of Sets", "Definition:Set Equality/Definition 2", "Definition:Limit of Sets" ]
proofwiki-8409
Closure of Intersection and Symmetric Difference imply Closure of Set Difference
Let $\RR$ be a system of sets such that for all $A, B \in \RR$: :$(1): \quad A \cap B \in \RR$ :$(2): \quad A \symdif B \in \RR$ where $\cap$ denotes set intersection and $\symdif$ denotes set symmetric difference. Then: :$\forall A, B \in \RR: A \setminus B \in \RR$ where $\setminus$ denotes set difference.
Let $A, B \in \RR$. From Set Difference as Symmetric Difference with Intersection: :$A \symdif \paren {A \cap B} = A \setminus B$ By hypothesis: :$A \cap B \in \RR$ and: :$A \symdif \paren {A \cap B} \in \RR$ and so: :$A \setminus B \in \RR$ {{qed}} Category:Set Intersection Category:Set Difference Category:Symmetric D...
Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:System of Sets|system of sets]] such that for all $A, B \in \RR$: :$(1): \quad A \cap B \in \RR$ :$(2): \quad A \symdif B \in \RR$ where $\cap$ denotes [[Definition:Set Intersection|set intersection]] and $\symdif$ denotes [[Definition:Symmetric Difference|set symmetric difference]]. Then:...
Let $A, B \in \RR$. From [[Set Difference as Symmetric Difference with Intersection]]: :$A \symdif \paren {A \cap B} = A \setminus B$ By hypothesis: :$A \cap B \in \RR$ and: :$A \symdif \paren {A \cap B} \in \RR$ and so: :$A \setminus B \in \RR$ {{qed}} [[Category:Set Intersection]] [[Category:Set Difference]] [[Ca...
Closure of Intersection and Symmetric Difference imply Closure of Set Difference
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Intersection_and_Symmetric_Difference_imply_Closure_of_Set_Difference
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Intersection_and_Symmetric_Difference_imply_Closure_of_Set_Difference
[ "Set Intersection", "Set Difference", "Symmetric Difference", "Set Systems" ]
[ "Definition:Set of Sets", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Symmetric Difference", "Definition:Set Difference" ]
[ "Set Difference as Symmetric Difference with Intersection", "Category:Set Intersection", "Category:Set Difference", "Category:Symmetric Difference", "Category:Set Systems" ]
proofwiki-8410
Closure of Intersection and Symmetric Difference imply Closure of Union
Let $\R R$ be a system of sets such that for all $A, B \in \RR$: :$(1): \quad A \cap B \in \RR$ :$(2): \quad A \symdif B \in \RR$ where $\cap$ denotes set intersection and $\symdif$ denotes set symmetric difference. Then: :$\forall A, B \in \RR: A \cup B \in \RR$ where $\cup$ denotes set union.
Let $A, B \in \RR$. From Union as Symmetric Difference with Intersection: :$\paren {A \symdif B} \symdif \paren {A \cap B} = A \cup B$ By hypothesis: :$A \cap B \in \RR$ and: :$\paren {A \symdif B} \symdif \paren {A \cap B} \in \RR$ and so: :$A \cup B \in \RR$ {{qed}} Category:Set Intersection Category:Set Union Catego...
Let $\R R$ be a [[Definition:System of Sets|system of sets]] such that for all $A, B \in \RR$: :$(1): \quad A \cap B \in \RR$ :$(2): \quad A \symdif B \in \RR$ where $\cap$ denotes [[Definition:Set Intersection|set intersection]] and $\symdif$ denotes [[Definition:Symmetric Difference|set symmetric difference]]. Then...
Let $A, B \in \RR$. From [[Union as Symmetric Difference with Intersection]]: :$\paren {A \symdif B} \symdif \paren {A \cap B} = A \cup B$ By hypothesis: :$A \cap B \in \RR$ and: :$\paren {A \symdif B} \symdif \paren {A \cap B} \in \RR$ and so: :$A \cup B \in \RR$ {{qed}} [[Category:Set Intersection]] [[Category:Se...
Closure of Intersection and Symmetric Difference imply Closure of Union
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Intersection_and_Symmetric_Difference_imply_Closure_of_Union
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Intersection_and_Symmetric_Difference_imply_Closure_of_Union
[ "Set Intersection", "Set Union", "Symmetric Difference", "Set Systems" ]
[ "Definition:Set of Sets", "Definition:Set Intersection", "Definition:Symmetric Difference", "Definition:Set Union" ]
[ "Union as Symmetric Difference with Intersection", "Category:Set Intersection", "Category:Set Union", "Category:Symmetric Difference", "Category:Set Systems" ]
proofwiki-8411
Empty Set and Set form Algebra of Sets
Let $S$ be any non-empty set. Then $\set {S, \O}$ is (trivially) an algebra of sets, where $S$ is the unit.
From Set Union is Idempotent: :$S \cup S = S$ and :$\O \cup \O = \O$ Then from Union with Empty Set: :$S \cup \O = S$ So $\set {S, \O}$ is closed under union. From Relative Complement of Empty Set: :$\relcomp S \O = S$ and from Relative Complement with Self is Empty Set: :$\relcomp S S = \O$ so $\set {S, \O}$ is closed...
Let $S$ be any [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty set]]. Then $\set {S, \O}$ is (trivially) an [[Definition:Algebra of Sets|algebra of sets]], where $S$ is the [[Definition:Unit of System of Sets|unit]].
From [[Set Union is Idempotent]]: :$S \cup S = S$ and :$\O \cup \O = \O$ Then from [[Union with Empty Set]]: :$S \cup \O = S$ So $\set {S, \O}$ is [[Definition:Closed Algebraic Structure|closed]] under [[Definition:Set Union|union]]. From [[Relative Complement of Empty Set]]: :$\relcomp S \O = S$ and from [[Relat...
Empty Set and Set form Algebra of Sets
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Empty_Set_and_Set_form_Algebra_of_Sets
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Empty_Set_and_Set_form_Algebra_of_Sets
[ "Algebras of Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Algebra of Sets", "Definition:Unit of System of Sets" ]
[ "Set Union is Idempotent", "Union with Empty Set", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure", "Definition:Set Union", "Relative Complement of Empty Set", "Relative Complement with Self is Empty Set", "Definition:Closed under Mapping", "Definition:Set Complement", "Definition:Algebr...
proofwiki-8412
Closure of Union and Complement imply Closure of Set Difference
Let $\RR$ be a system of sets on a universe $\mathbb U$ such that for all $A, B \in \RR$: :$(1): \quad A \cup B \in \RR$ :$(2): \quad \map \complement A \in \RR$ where $\cup$ denotes set union and $\complement$ denotes complement (relative to $\mathbb U$). Then: :$\forall A, B \in \RR: A \setminus B \in \RR$ where $\se...
Let $A, B \in \RR$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = A \setminus B | r = A \cap \map \complement B | c = Set Difference as Intersection with Complement }} {{eqn | r = \map \complement {\map \complement A \cup B} | c = De Morgan's Laws: Complement of Intersection }} {{end-eqn}} As both set union and complemen...
Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:System of Sets|system of sets]] on a [[Definition:Universal Set|universe]] $\mathbb U$ such that for all $A, B \in \RR$: :$(1): \quad A \cup B \in \RR$ :$(2): \quad \map \complement A \in \RR$ where $\cup$ denotes [[Definition:Set Union|set union]] and $\complement$ denotes [[Definition:Set ...
Let $A, B \in \RR$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = A \setminus B | r = A \cap \map \complement B | c = [[Set Difference as Intersection with Complement]] }} {{eqn | r = \map \complement {\map \complement A \cup B} | c = [[De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Complement of Intersection|De Morgan's ...
Closure of Union and Complement imply Closure of Set Difference
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Union_and_Complement_imply_Closure_of_Set_Difference
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Union_and_Complement_imply_Closure_of_Set_Difference
[ "Set Union", "Set Difference", "Set Complement", "Set Systems" ]
[ "Definition:Set of Sets", "Definition:Universal Set", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Complement", "Definition:Set Difference" ]
[ "Set Difference as Intersection with Complement", "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Complement of Intersection", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Set Complement", "Definition:Closure (Abstract Algebra)/Algebraic Structure" ]
proofwiki-8413
Complement of Limit Inferior is Limit Superior of Complements
Let $\sequence {E_n}_{n \mathop \in \N}$ be a sequence of sets. Then: :$\ds \map \complement {\liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} = \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ \map \complement {E_n}$ where $\liminf$ and $\limsup$ denote the limit inferior and limit superior, respectively.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} | r = \map \complement {\bigcup_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \bigcap_{i \mathop = n}^\infty E_n} | c = {{Defof|Limit Inferior of Sequence of Sets|index = 1}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \map \complement {\bigcap_{i...
Let $\sequence {E_n}_{n \mathop \in \N}$ be a [[Definition:Sequence|sequence]] of [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Then: :$\ds \map \complement {\liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} = \limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ \map \complement {E_n}$ where $\liminf$ and $\limsup$ denote the [[Definition:Limit Inferior of Sequence of...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} | r = \map \complement {\bigcup_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \bigcap_{i \mathop = n}^\infty E_n} | c = {{Defof|Limit Inferior of Sequence of Sets|index = 1}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \map \complement {\bigcap_{i...
Complement of Limit Inferior is Limit Superior of Complements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complement_of_Limit_Inferior_is_Limit_Superior_of_Complements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complement_of_Limit_Inferior_is_Limit_Superior_of_Complements
[ "Limits Superior of Set Sequences", "Limits Inferior of Set Sequences" ]
[ "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Limit Inferior of Sequence of Sets", "Definition:Limit Superior of Sequence of Sets" ]
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Union", "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Intersection" ]
proofwiki-8414
Complement of Limit Superior is Limit Inferior of Complements
Let $\sequence {E_n}_{n \mathop \in \N}$ be a sequence of sets. Then: :$\ds \map \complement {\limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} = \liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ \map \complement {E_n}$ where $\limsup$ and $\liminf$ denote the limit superior and limit inferior, respectively.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} | r = \map \complement {\bigcap_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \bigcup_{i \mathop = n}^\infty E_n} | c = {{Defof|Limit Superior of Sequence of Sets|index = 1}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcup_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \map \complement {\bigcup_{i...
Let $\sequence {E_n}_{n \mathop \in \N}$ be a [[Definition:Sequence|sequence]] of [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Then: :$\ds \map \complement {\limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} = \liminf_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ \map \complement {E_n}$ where $\limsup$ and $\liminf$ denote the [[Definition:Limit Superior of Sequence of...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \complement {\limsup_{n \mathop \to \infty} \ E_n} | r = \map \complement {\bigcap_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \bigcup_{i \mathop = n}^\infty E_n} | c = {{Defof|Limit Superior of Sequence of Sets|index = 1}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcup_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \map \complement {\bigcup_{i...
Complement of Limit Superior is Limit Inferior of Complements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complement_of_Limit_Superior_is_Limit_Inferior_of_Complements
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Complement_of_Limit_Superior_is_Limit_Inferior_of_Complements
[ "Limits Superior of Set Sequences", "Limits Inferior of Set Sequences" ]
[ "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Limit Superior of Sequence of Sets", "Definition:Limit Inferior of Sequence of Sets" ]
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Intersection", "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Complement/Family of Sets/Complement of Union" ]
proofwiki-8415
Sigma-Ring is Closed under Countable Intersections
Let $\RR$ be a $\sigma$-ring. Let $\sequence {A_n}_{n \mathop \in \N} \in \RR$ be a sequence of sets in $\RR$. Then: :$\ds \bigcap_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty A_n \in \RR$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall n \in \N_{>0} | l = A_1, A_n \in \RR | o = \leadsto | r = A_1 \setminus A_n \in \RR | c = Axiom $(\text {SR} 2)$ for $\sigma$-rings }} {{eqn | o = \leadsto | r = \bigcup_{n \mathop = 2}^\infty \paren {A_1 \setminus A_n} \in \RR | c = Axiom $(\text {S...
Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Sigma-Ring|$\sigma$-ring]]. Let $\sequence {A_n}_{n \mathop \in \N} \in \RR$ be a [[Definition:Sequence|sequence]] of [[Definition:Set|sets]] in $\RR$. Then: :$\ds \bigcap_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty A_n \in \RR$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | q = \forall n \in \N_{>0} | l = A_1, A_n \in \RR | o = \leadsto | r = A_1 \setminus A_n \in \RR | c = Axiom $(\text {SR} 2)$ for [[Definition:Sigma-Ring|$\sigma$-rings]] }} {{eqn | o = \leadsto | r = \bigcup_{n \mathop = 2}^\infty \paren {A_1 \setminus A_n} \in \RR ...
Sigma-Ring is Closed under Countable Intersections
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sigma-Ring_is_Closed_under_Countable_Intersections
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sigma-Ring_is_Closed_under_Countable_Intersections
[ "Sigma-Rings" ]
[ "Definition:Sigma-Ring", "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Set" ]
[ "Definition:Sigma-Ring", "Definition:Sigma-Ring", "Definition:Sigma-Ring", "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Difference/Family of Sets/Difference with Intersection", "Set Difference with Set Difference" ]
proofwiki-8416
Pappus's Hexagon Theorem
Let $A, B, C$ be a set of collinear points. Let $a, b, c$ be another set of collinear points. Let $X, Y, Z$ be the points of intersection of each of the straight lines $Ab$ and $aB$, $Ac$ and $aC$, and $Bc$ and $bC$. Then $X, Y, Z$ are collinear points.
300px The notation has been changed to match the source. Let $ACE$ be collinear and $BFD$ also be collinear. Join $ABCDEF$ in order. The points where opposite sides of the hexagon cut each other are $NLM$: * $AB$ and $DE$ cross at $L$ * $BC$ and $EF$ cross at $N$ * $CD$ and $FA$ cross at $M$ $NLM$ are to be proved coll...
Let $A, B, C$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Collinear Points|collinear points]]. Let $a, b, c$ be another [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Collinear Points|collinear points]]. Let $X, Y, Z$ be the [[Definition:Intersection (Geometry)|points of intersection]] of each of the [[Definition:Straight Li...
[[File:PappusHexagonTheorem-1.png|300px]] The notation has been changed to match the source. Let $ACE$ be [[Definition:Collinear Points|collinear]] and $BFD$ also be [[Definition:Collinear Points|collinear]]. Join $ABCDEF$ in order. The [[Definition:Point|points]] where [[Definition:Opposite Sides|opposite sides]] ...
Pappus's Hexagon Theorem/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Pappus's_Hexagon_Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Pappus's_Hexagon_Theorem/Proof_1
[ "Pappus's Hexagon Theorem", "Pappus's Theorems", "Euclidean Geometry", "Projective Geometry" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Collinear/Points", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Collinear/Points", "Definition:Intersection (Geometry)", "Definition:Line/Straight Line", "Definition:Collinear/Points" ]
[ "File:PappusHexagonTheorem-1.png", "Definition:Collinear/Points", "Definition:Collinear/Points", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Polygon/Opposite", "Definition:Hexagon", "Definition:Collinear/Points", "Menelaus's Theorem", "Definition:Transversal (Geometry)", "Menelaus's Theorem", "Menelaus's Th...
proofwiki-8417
Plane contains Infinite Number of Lines
A plane contains an infinite number of distinct lines.
A plane contains an infinite number of points. Not all these points are collinear. Let $A$, $B$ and $C$ be points in a plane $P$. From Propositions of Incidence: Line in Plane, any two of these points determine a line. Consider the lines $AB$, $AC$ and $BC$, all of which are distinct. Let $X$ be one of the infinite num...
A [[Definition:Plane|plane]] contains an [[Definition:Infinite Set|infinite number]] of [[Definition:Distinct Elements|distinct]] [[Definition:Straight Line|lines]].
A [[Definition:Plane|plane]] contains an [[Definition:Infinite Set|infinite number]] of [[Definition:Point|points]]. Not all these [[Definition:Point|points]] are [[Definition:Collinear Points|collinear]]. Let $A$, $B$ and $C$ be [[Definition:Point|points]] in a [[Definition:Plane|plane]] $P$. From [[Axiom:Propositi...
Plane contains Infinite Number of Lines
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Plane_contains_Infinite_Number_of_Lines
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Plane_contains_Infinite_Number_of_Lines
[ "Projective Geometry" ]
[ "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Infinite Set", "Definition:Distinct/Plural", "Definition:Line/Straight Line" ]
[ "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Infinite Set", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Collinear/Points", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Axiom:Propositions of Incidence/Line in Plane", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Line/Straight Line", "Definition:Line/Str...
proofwiki-8418
Two Planes have Line in Common
Two distinct planes have exactly one (straight) line in common.
Take two distinct lines in plane $1$. From Propositions of Incidence: Plane and Line, they each meet plane $2$ in one point each, say at $A$ and $B$. Thus $A$ and $B$ both lie in both planes. Thus the line defined by $A$ and $B$ lies in both planes. {{qed}} {{Handwaving}}
Two [[Definition:Distinct Elements|distinct]] [[Definition:Plane|planes]] have exactly one [[Definition:Straight Line|(straight) line]] in common.
Take two [[Definition:Distinct Elements|distinct]] [[Definition:Straight Line|lines]] in [[Definition:Plane|plane]] $1$. From [[Axiom:Propositions of Incidence/Plane and Line|Propositions of Incidence: Plane and Line]], they each meet [[Definition:Plane|plane]] $2$ in one point each, say at $A$ and $B$. Thus $A$ and ...
Two Planes have Line in Common
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Two_Planes_have_Line_in_Common
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Two_Planes_have_Line_in_Common
[ "Projective Geometry" ]
[ "Definition:Distinct/Plural", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Line/Straight Line" ]
[ "Definition:Distinct/Plural", "Definition:Line/Straight Line", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Axiom:Propositions of Incidence/Plane and Line", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Line/Straight Line", "Definition:Plane Surface" ]
proofwiki-8419
Three Non-Collinear Planes have One Point in Common
Three planes which are not collinear have exactly one point in all three planes.
Let $A$, $B$ and $C$ be the three planes in question. From Two Planes have Line in Common, $A$ and $B$ share a line, $p$ say. From Propositions of Incidence: Plane and Line, $p$ meets $C$ in one point. {{qed}}
Three [[Definition:Plane|planes]] which are not [[Definition:Collinear Planes|collinear]] have exactly one [[Definition:Point|point]] in all three [[Definition:Plane|planes]].
Let $A$, $B$ and $C$ be the three [[Definition:Plane|planes]] in question. From [[Two Planes have Line in Common]], $A$ and $B$ share a [[Definition:Straight Line|line]], $p$ say. From [[Axiom:Propositions of Incidence/Plane and Line|Propositions of Incidence: Plane and Line]], $p$ meets $C$ in one [[Definition:Point...
Three Non-Collinear Planes have One Point in Common
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Three_Non-Collinear_Planes_have_One_Point_in_Common
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Three_Non-Collinear_Planes_have_One_Point_in_Common
[ "Projective Geometry" ]
[ "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Collinear/Planes", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Plane Surface" ]
[ "Definition:Plane Surface", "Two Planes have Line in Common", "Definition:Line/Straight Line", "Axiom:Propositions of Incidence/Plane and Line", "Definition:Point" ]
proofwiki-8420
Desargues' Theorem
Let $\triangle ABC$ and $\triangle A'B'C'$ be triangles lying in the same or different planes. Let the lines $AA'$, $BB'$ and $CC'$ intersect in the point $O$. Then: :$BC$ meets $B'C'$ in $L$ :$CA$ meets $C'A'$ in $M$ :$AB$ meets $A'B'$ in $N$ where $L, M, N$ are collinear.
:500px Let $\triangle ABC$ and $\triangle A'B'C'$ be in different planes $\pi$ and $\pi'$ respectively. Since $BB'$ and $CC'$ intersect in $O$, it follows that $B$, $B'$, $C$ and $C'$ lie in a plane. Thus $BC$ must meet $B'C'$ in a point $L$. By the same argument, $CA$ meets $C'A'$ in a point $M$ and $AB$ meets $A'B'$ ...
Let $\triangle ABC$ and $\triangle A'B'C'$ be [[Definition:Triangle (Geometry)|triangles]] lying in the same or different [[Definition:Plane|planes]]. Let the [[Definition:Straight Line|lines]] $AA'$, $BB'$ and $CC'$ [[Definition:Intersection (Geometry)|intersect]] in the [[Definition:Point|point]] $O$. Then: :$BC$ ...
:[[File:DesarguesTheorem.png|500px]] Let $\triangle ABC$ and $\triangle A'B'C'$ be in different [[Definition:Plane|planes]] $\pi$ and $\pi'$ respectively. Since $BB'$ and $CC'$ [[Definition:Intersection (Geometry)|intersect]] in $O$, it follows that $B$, $B'$, $C$ and $C'$ lie in a [[Definition:Plane|plane]]. Thus ...
Desargues' Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Desargues'_Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Desargues'_Theorem
[ "Desargues' Theorem", "Projective Geometry" ]
[ "Definition:Triangle (Geometry)", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Line/Straight Line", "Definition:Intersection (Geometry)", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Collinear/Points" ]
[ "File:DesarguesTheorem.png", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Intersection (Geometry)", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Point", "Definition:Plane Surface", "Two Planes have Line in Common", "Definition:Collinear/Points", ...
proofwiki-8421
Union of Mappings which Agree is Mapping
Let $A, B, Y$ be sets. Let $f: A \to Y$ and $g: B \to Y$ be mappings. Let $X = A \cup B$. Let $f$ and $g$ agree on $A \cap B$. Then $f \cup g: X \to Y$ is a mapping.
By definition, $f \cup g$ is a relation whose domain is $X = A \cup B$. Let $\tuple {x, y_1} \in f \cup g$ and $\tuple {x, y_2} \in f \cup g$. At least one of the following must be true: :$(1): \quad \tuple {x, y_1} \in f, \tuple {x, y_2} \in f$ :$(2): \quad \tuple {x, y_1} \in g, \tuple {x, y_2} \in g$ :$(3): \quad \t...
Let $A, B, Y$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $f: A \to Y$ and $g: B \to Y$ be [[Definition:Mapping|mappings]]. Let $X = A \cup B$. Let $f$ and $g$ [[Definition:Agreement of Mappings|agree]] on $A \cap B$. Then $f \cup g: X \to Y$ is a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]].
By definition, $f \cup g$ is a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] whose [[Definition:Domain of Relation|domain]] is $X = A \cup B$. Let $\tuple {x, y_1} \in f \cup g$ and $\tuple {x, y_2} \in f \cup g$. At least one of the following must be true: :$(1): \quad \tuple {x, y_1} \in f, \tuple {x, y_2} \in f$ :$(2): \quad \...
Union of Mappings which Agree is Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Mappings_which_Agree_is_Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Mappings_which_Agree_is_Mapping
[ "Mapping Theory", "Set Union" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Agreement/Mappings", "Definition:Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Relation", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:By Hypothesis", "Definition:Mapping" ]
proofwiki-8422
Domain of Composite Mapping
Let $S_1, S_2, S_3$ be sets. Let $f_1: S_1 \to S_2$ and $f_2: S_2 \to S_3$ be mappings. Let $f_2 \circ f_1: S_1 \to S_3$ be the composite mapping of $f_1$ and $f_2$. Then: :$\Dom {f_1} = \Dom {f_2 \circ f_1}$ where $\Dom {f_1}$ denotes the domain of $f_1$.
By definition of composition of mappings: :$f_2 \circ f_1 := \set {\tuple {x, z} \in S_1 \times S_3: \exists y \in S_2: \tuple {x, y} \in f_1 \land \tuple {y, z} \in f_2}$ {{explain|Not quite what that definition says any more}} Let $x \in \Dom {f_2 \circ f_1}$. Then: :$\exists z \in S_3: \tuple {x, z} \in S_1 \times S...
Let $S_1, S_2, S_3$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $f_1: S_1 \to S_2$ and $f_2: S_2 \to S_3$ be [[Definition:Mapping|mappings]]. Let $f_2 \circ f_1: S_1 \to S_3$ be the [[Definition:Composition of Mappings|composite mapping]] of $f_1$ and $f_2$. Then: :$\Dom {f_1} = \Dom {f_2 \circ f_1}$ where $\Dom {f_1}$ denotes...
By definition of [[Definition:Composition of Mappings|composition of mappings]]: :$f_2 \circ f_1 := \set {\tuple {x, z} \in S_1 \times S_3: \exists y \in S_2: \tuple {x, y} \in f_1 \land \tuple {y, z} \in f_2}$ {{explain|Not quite what that definition says any more}} Let $x \in \Dom {f_2 \circ f_1}$. Then: :$\exists...
Domain of Composite Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Domain_of_Composite_Mapping
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Domain_of_Composite_Mapping
[ "Composite Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Composition of Mappings", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Composition of Mappings", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Composition of Mappings", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Set Equality/Definition 2" ]
proofwiki-8423
Identity Mapping is Idempotent
Let $S$ be a set. Let $I_S: S \to S$ be the identity mapping on $S$. Then $I_S$ is idempotent: :$I_S \circ I_S = I_S$
From Identity Mapping is Left Identity: :$I_S \circ f = f$ for all mappings $f: S \to S$. From Identity Mapping is Right Identity: :$f \circ I_S = f$ for all mappings $f: S \to S$. Substituting $I_S$ for $f$ in either one and the result follows. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $I_S: S \to S$ be the [[Definition:Identity Mapping|identity mapping]] on $S$. Then $I_S$ is [[Definition:Idempotent Mapping|idempotent]]: :$I_S \circ I_S = I_S$
From [[Identity Mapping is Left Identity]]: :$I_S \circ f = f$ for all [[Definition:Mapping|mappings]] $f: S \to S$. From [[Identity Mapping is Right Identity]]: :$f \circ I_S = f$ for all [[Definition:Mapping|mappings]] $f: S \to S$. Substituting $I_S$ for $f$ in either one and the result follows. {{qed}}
Identity Mapping is Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Mapping_is_Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Identity_Mapping_is_Idempotent
[ "Identity Mappings" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Identity Mapping", "Definition:Idempotence/Mapping" ]
[ "Identity Mapping is Left Identity", "Definition:Mapping", "Identity Mapping is Right Identity", "Definition:Mapping" ]
proofwiki-8424
Union of Functions Theorem
Let $X$ be a set. Let $\sequence {X_i: i \in \N}$ be an exhausting sequence of sets on $X$. For each $i \in \N$, let $g_i: X_i \to Y$ be a mapping such that: :$g_{i + 1} \restriction X_i = g_i$ where $g_{i + 1} \restriction X_i$ denotes the restriction of $g_{i + 1}$ to $g_i$. Then: :$\ds \bigcup \set {g_i: i \in \N}$ ...
By definition, $\ds g = \bigcup \set {g_i: i \in \N}$ is a relation whose domain is $X$. {{AimForCont}} $g$ is not a mapping. Then for some $x \in X$ and $i, h \in \N$: :$(1): \quad x \in X_i, \map {g_i} x \ne \map {g_{i + h} } x$ Let $k \in \N$ be the smallest such that: :$\map {g_i} x \ne g_{i + k}$ where $x$ and $i$...
Let $X$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\sequence {X_i: i \in \N}$ be an [[Definition:Exhausting Sequence of Sets|exhausting sequence of sets]] on $X$. For each $i \in \N$, let $g_i: X_i \to Y$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]] such that: :$g_{i + 1} \restriction X_i = g_i$ where $g_{i + 1} \restriction X_i$ deno...
By definition, $\ds g = \bigcup \set {g_i: i \in \N}$ is a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] whose [[Definition:Domain of Relation|domain]] is $X$. {{AimForCont}} $g$ is not a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Then for some $x \in X$ and $i, h \in \N$: :$(1): \quad x \in X_i, \map {g_i} x \ne \map {g_{i + h} } x$ Let $...
Union of Functions Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Functions_Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Functions_Theorem
[ "Mapping Theory", "Named Theorems" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Exhausting Sequence of Sets", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Restriction/Mapping", "Definition:Mapping" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Relation", "Definition:Mapping", "Proof by Contradiction", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:False", "Definition:Mapping" ]
proofwiki-8425
Inductive Definition of Sequence
Let $X$ be a set. Let $h \in \N$. Let $a_i \in X$ for all $i \in \set {1, 2, \ldots, h}$. Let $S$ be the set of all finite sequences whose codomains are in $X$. Let $G: S \to X$ be a mapping. Then there is a unique sequence $f$ whose codomain is in $X$ such that: :$f_i = \begin{cases} a_i & : i \in \set {1, 2, \ldots, ...
{{finish|tedious}}
Let $X$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $h \in \N$. Let $a_i \in X$ for all $i \in \set {1, 2, \ldots, h}$. Let $S$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Finite Sequence|finite sequences]] whose [[Definition:Codomain|codomains]] are in $X$. Let $G: S \to X$ be a [[Definition:Mapping|mapping]]. Then t...
{{finish|tedious}}
Inductive Definition of Sequence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inductive_Definition_of_Sequence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Inductive_Definition_of_Sequence
[ "Mapping Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Finite Sequence", "Definition:Codomain", "Definition:Mapping", "Definition:Unique", "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Codomain" ]
[]
proofwiki-8426
Model of Root of Propositional Tableau is Model of Branch
Let $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$ be a propositional tableau. Let $v: \LL_0 \to \set {\T, \F}$ be a boolean interpretation such that: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf H$ that is, such that $v$ is a model for the root $\mathbf H$ of $T$. Then there exists a branch $\Gamma$ of $T$ such that: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \...
We will find it convenient to reason with the constructive definition of a propositional tableau. First, let us reduce to the case of a finite propositional tableau. Suppose the result were to hold for these finite tableaus. Let $T$ be an infinite propositional tableau. Suppose that no finite branch $\Gamma$ of $T$ sat...
Let $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$ be a [[Definition:Propositional Tableau|propositional tableau]]. Let $v: \LL_0 \to \set {\T, \F}$ be a [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretation]] such that: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf H$ that is, such that $v$ is a [[Definition:Model (Boolean Interpretation...
We will find it convenient to reason with the [[Definition:Propositional Tableau/Construction|constructive definition of a propositional tableau]]. First, let us reduce to the case of a finite [[Definition:Propositional Tableau|propositional tableau]]. Suppose the result were to hold for these finite [[Definition:Pr...
Model of Root of Propositional Tableau is Model of Branch
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Model_of_Root_of_Propositional_Tableau_is_Model_of_Branch
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Model_of_Root_of_Propositional_Tableau_is_Model_of_Branch
[ "Propositional Tableaux" ]
[ "Definition:Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Model (Boolean Interpretations)", "Definition:Labeled Tree for Propositional Logic/Hypothesis Set", "Definition:Rooted Tree/Branch", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Subset" ]
[ "Definition:Propositional Tableau/Construction", "Definition:Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Rooted Tree/Branch/Finite", "Definition:Exhausting Sequence of Sets", "Definition:Labeled Tree for Propositional Logic", "Definition:...
proofwiki-8427
Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Antisymmetric
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation which is not null. Let $\RR$ be antireflexive and transitive. Then $\RR$ is also antisymmetric.
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be antireflexive and transitive. From Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Asymmetric it follows that $\RR$ is asymmetric. The result follows from Asymmetric Relation is Antisymmetric. {{qed}}
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] which is not [[Definition:Null Relation|null]]. Let $\RR$ be [[Definition:Antireflexive Relation|antireflexive]] and [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. Then $\RR$ is also [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]].
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be [[Definition:Antireflexive Relation|antireflexive]] and [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. From [[Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Asymmetric]] it follows that $\RR$ is [[Definition:Asymmetric Relation|asymmetric]]. The result follows from [[Asymmetric Relation is...
Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Antisymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Antireflexive_and_Transitive_Relation_is_Antisymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Antireflexive_and_Transitive_Relation_is_Antisymmetric
[ "Antireflexive Relations", "Antisymmetric Relations", "Transitive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Null Relation", "Definition:Antireflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Antireflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Asymmetric", "Definition:Asymmetric Relation", "Asymmetric Relation is Antisymmetric" ]
proofwiki-8428
Tableau Confutation implies Unsatisfiable
Let $\mathbf H$ be a collection of WFFs of propositional logic. Suppose there exists a tableau confutation of $\mathbf H$. Then $\mathbf H$ is unsatisfiable for boolean interpretations.
Let $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$ be a tableau confutation of $\mathbf H$. Suppose that $v$ were a boolean interpretation model for $\mathbf H$, that is: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf H$ By Model of Root of Propositional Tableau is Model of Branch, it follows that: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \Phi \sqbrk \Gamma$ for...
Let $\mathbf H$ be a collection of [[Definition:WFF of Propositional Logic|WFFs of propositional logic]]. Suppose there exists a [[Definition:Tableau Confutation|tableau confutation]] of $\mathbf H$. Then $\mathbf H$ is [[Definition:Unsatisfiable|unsatisfiable]] for [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interp...
Let $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$ be a [[Definition:Tableau Confutation|tableau confutation]] of $\mathbf H$. Suppose that $v$ were a [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretation]] [[Definition:Model (Boolean Interpretations)|model]] for $\mathbf H$, that is: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf H$ By [[...
Tableau Confutation implies Unsatisfiable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tableau_Confutation_implies_Unsatisfiable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Tableau_Confutation_implies_Unsatisfiable
[ "Propositional Tableaux" ]
[ "Definition:Language of Propositional Logic/Formal Grammar/WFF", "Definition:Tableau Confutation", "Definition:Unsatisfiable", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation" ]
[ "Definition:Tableau Confutation", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Model (Boolean Interpretations)", "Model of Root of Propositional Tableau is Model of Branch", "Definition:Rooted Tree/Branch", "Definition:Tableau Confutation", "Definition:Language of Propositional Logic/Formal Grammar/...
proofwiki-8429
Finished Branch Lemma
Let $\Gamma$ be a finished branch of a propositional tableau $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$. Let $v$ be a boolean interpretation such that: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf A$ for every basic WFF $\mathbf A$ that occurs along $\Gamma$. Then: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI} } \Phi \sqbrk \Gamma$ where $\Phi \sqbrk \Gamma$ is ...
The proof appeals to the Principle of Structural Induction, applied to the statement: :If $\mathbf C$ occurs along $\Gamma$, then $v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf C$. When $\mathbf C$ is basic, the result holds per assumption. Suppose $\mathbf C$ is not basic. It is seen that one of the propositional tableau constructi...
Let $\Gamma$ be a [[Definition:Finished Branch of Propositional Tableau|finished branch]] of a [[Definition:Propositional Tableau|propositional tableau]] $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$. Let $v$ be a [[Definition:Boolean Interpretation|boolean interpretation]] such that: :$v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf A$ for every ...
The proof appeals to the [[Principle of Structural Induction]], applied to the [[Definition:Statement|statement]]: :If $\mathbf C$ [[Definition:Occurrence along Branch|occurs]] along $\Gamma$, then $v \models_{\mathrm{BI}} \mathbf C$. When $\mathbf C$ is [[Definition:Basic WFF|basic]], the result holds per assumptio...
Finished Branch Lemma
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finished_Branch_Lemma
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finished_Branch_Lemma
[ "Finished Branch Lemma", "Propositional Tableaux" ]
[ "Definition:Finished Branch of Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Boolean Interpretation", "Definition:Literal", "Definition:Labeled Tree for Propositional Logic/Along a Branch", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Mapping/Subset" ]
[ "Principle of Structural Induction", "Definition:Statement", "Definition:Labeled Tree for Propositional Logic/Along a Branch", "Definition:Literal", "Definition:Literal", "Definition:Propositional Tableau/Construction", "Definition:Used WFF", "Double Negation/Formulation 1/Proof by Truth Table", "De...
proofwiki-8430
Diagonal Relation is Serial
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\Delta_S$ be the diagonal relation on $S$. Then $\Delta_S$ is a serial relation.
By Diagonal Relation is Equivalence it follows {{afortiori}} that $\Delta_S$ is reflexive. The result follows from Reflexive Relation is Serial. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\Delta_S$ be the [[Definition:Diagonal Relation|diagonal relation]] on $S$. Then $\Delta_S$ is a [[Definition:Serial Relation|serial relation]].
By [[Diagonal Relation is Equivalence]] it follows {{afortiori}} that $\Delta_S$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]]. The result follows from [[Reflexive Relation is Serial]]. {{qed}}
Diagonal Relation is Serial
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Diagonal_Relation_is_Serial
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Diagonal_Relation_is_Serial
[ "Serial Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Diagonal Relation", "Definition:Serial Relation" ]
[ "Diagonal Relation is Equivalence", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Reflexive Relation is Serial" ]
proofwiki-8431
Serial Relation is not Null
Let $S$ be a set such that $S \ne \O$. Let $\RR$ be a serial relation on $S$. Then $\RR$ is not a null relation.
As $S$ is non-empty set: :$\exists x: x \in S$ As $\RR$ be a serial relation on $S$: :$\exists y \in S: \tuple {x, y} \in \RR$ That is: :$\RR \ne \O$ Hence the result by definition of null relation. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]] such that $S \ne \O$. Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Serial Relation|serial relation]] on $S$. Then $\RR$ is not a [[Definition:Null Relation|null relation]].
As $S$ is [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empty set]]: :$\exists x: x \in S$ As $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Serial Relation|serial relation]] on $S$: :$\exists y \in S: \tuple {x, y} \in \RR$ That is: :$\RR \ne \O$ Hence the result by definition of [[Definition:Null Relation|null relation]]. {{qed}}
Serial Relation is not Null
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Serial_Relation_is_not_Null
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Serial_Relation_is_not_Null
[ "Serial Relations", "Null Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Serial Relation", "Definition:Null Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Serial Relation", "Definition:Null Relation" ]
proofwiki-8432
Transitive Relation is Antireflexive iff Asymmetric
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation which is not null. Let $\RR$ be transitive. Then $\RR$ is antireflexive {{iff}} $\RR$ is asymmetric.
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be antireflexive. Then by Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Asymmetric it follows that $\RR$ is asymmetric. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] which is not [[Definition:Null Relation|null]]. Let $\RR$ be [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. Then $\RR$ is [[Definition:Antireflexive Relation|antireflexive]] {{iff}} $\RR$ is [[Definition:Asymmetric Relation|asymmetric]].
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be [[Definition:Antireflexive Relation|antireflexive]]. Then by [[Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Asymmetric]] it follows that $\RR$ is [[Definition:Asymmetric Relation|asymmetric]]. {{qed|lemma}}
Transitive Relation is Antireflexive iff Asymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Relation_is_Antireflexive_iff_Asymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_Relation_is_Antireflexive_iff_Asymmetric
[ "Antireflexive Relations", "Asymmetric Relations", "Transitive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Null Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antireflexive Relation", "Definition:Asymmetric Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Antireflexive Relation", "Antireflexive and Transitive Relation is Asymmetric", "Definition:Asymmetric Relation", "Definition:Asymmetric Relation", "Definition:Antireflexive Relation" ]
proofwiki-8433
Symmetric and Antisymmetric Relation is Transitive
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation in $S$ which is both symmetric and antisymmetric. Then $\RR$ is transitive.
Let $\tuple {x, y}, \tuple {y, z} \in \RR$. By Relation is Symmetric and Antisymmetric iff Coreflexive: :$x = y, y = z$ and so trivially: :$\tuple {x, z} = \tuple {x, x} \in \RR$ Thus $\RR$ is transitive. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] in $S$ which is both [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric]] and [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]]. Then $\RR$ is [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]].
Let $\tuple {x, y}, \tuple {y, z} \in \RR$. By [[Relation is Symmetric and Antisymmetric iff Coreflexive]]: :$x = y, y = z$ and so trivially: :$\tuple {x, z} = \tuple {x, x} \in \RR$ Thus $\RR$ is [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. {{qed}}
Symmetric and Antisymmetric Relation is Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Symmetric_and_Antisymmetric_Relation_is_Transitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Symmetric_and_Antisymmetric_Relation_is_Transitive
[ "Symmetric Relations", "Antisymmetric Relations", "Transitive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
[ "Relation is Symmetric and Antisymmetric iff Coreflexive", "Definition:Transitive Relation" ]
proofwiki-8434
Relation is Reflexive Symmetric and Antisymmetric iff Diagonal Relation
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation in $S$. Then: :$\RR$ is reflexive, symmetric and antisymmetric {{iff}}: :$\RR$ is the diagonal relation $\Delta_S$.
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR$ is reflexive, symmetric and antisymmetric. By definition of reflexive: :$\Delta_S \subseteq \RR$ From Relation is Symmetric and Antisymmetric iff Coreflexive: :$\RR \subseteq \Delta_S$ By definition of set equality: :$\RR = \Delta_S$ {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] in $S$. Then: :$\RR$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]], [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric]] and [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]] {{iff}}: :$\RR$ is the [[Definition:Diagon...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]], [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric]] and [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]]. By definition of [[Definition:Reflexive Relation/Definition 2|reflexive]]: :$\Delta_S \subseteq \RR$ From [[Relation is Symmetric ...
Relation is Reflexive Symmetric and Antisymmetric iff Diagonal Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Reflexive_Symmetric_and_Antisymmetric_iff_Diagonal_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Reflexive_Symmetric_and_Antisymmetric_iff_Diagonal_Relation
[ "Reflexive Relations", "Symmetric Relations", "Antisymmetric Relations", "Diagonal Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Diagonal Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation/Definition 2", "Relation is Symmetric and Antisymmetric iff Coreflexive", "Definition:Set Equality/Definition 2", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Relation is Symmetri...
proofwiki-8435
Relation is Reflexive and Coreflexive iff Diagonal
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation on $S$. Then $\RR$ is reflexive and coreflexive {{iff}}: : $\RR = \Delta_S$ where $\Delta_S$ is the diagonal relation.
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be reflexive and coreflexive. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \RR | o = \supseteq | r = \Delta_S | c = {{Defof|Reflexive Relation|index = 2}} }} {{eqn | l = \RR | o = \subseteq | r = \Delta_S | c = {{Defof|Coreflexive Relatio...
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] on $S$. Then $\RR$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] and [[Definition:Coreflexive Relation|coreflexive]] {{iff}}: : $\RR = \Delta_S$ where $\Delta_S$ is the [[Definition:Diagonal Relation|diagonal re...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] and [[Definition:Coreflexive Relation|coreflexive]]. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \RR | o = \supseteq | r = \Delta_S | c = {{Defof|Reflexive Relation|index = 2}} }} {{eqn | l = \RR | o ...
Relation is Reflexive and Coreflexive iff Diagonal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Reflexive_and_Coreflexive_iff_Diagonal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Reflexive_and_Coreflexive_iff_Diagonal
[ "Reflexive Relations", "Coreflexive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Coreflexive Relation", "Definition:Diagonal Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Coreflexive Relation" ]
proofwiki-8436
Symmetric Preordering is Equivalence Relation
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a preordering on a set $S$. Let $\RR$ also be symmetric. Then $\RR$ is an equivalence relation on $S$.
By definition, a preordering on $S$ is a relation on $S$ which is: :$(1): \quad$ reflexive and: :$(2): \quad$ transitive. Thus $\RR$ is a relation on $S$ which is reflexive, transitive and symmetric. Thus by definition $\RR$ is an equivalence relation on $S$. {{qed}}
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Preordering|preordering]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Let $\RR$ also be [[Definition:Symmetric Relation|symmetric]]. Then $\RR$ is an [[Definition:Equivalence Relation|equivalence relation]] on $S$.
By definition, a [[Definition:Preordering|preordering]] on $S$ is a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$ which is: :$(1): \quad$ [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] and: :$(2): \quad$ [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. Thus $\RR$ is a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$ which is [[D...
Symmetric Preordering is Equivalence Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Symmetric_Preordering_is_Equivalence_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Symmetric_Preordering_is_Equivalence_Relation
[ "Preorder Theory", "Equivalence Relations", "Symmetric Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Preordering", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Preordering", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Symmetric Relation", "Definition:Equivalence Relation" ]
proofwiki-8437
Antisymmetric Preordering is Ordering
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a preordering on a set $S$. Let $\RR$ also be antisymmetric. Then $\RR$ is an ordering on $S$.
By definition, a preordering on $S$ is a relation on $S$ which is: :$(1): \quad$ reflexive and: :$(2): \quad$ transitive. Thus $\RR$ is a relation on $S$ which is reflexive, transitive and antisymmetric. Thus by definition $\RR$ is an ordering on $S$. {{qed}}
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Preordering|preordering]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Let $\RR$ also be [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]]. Then $\RR$ is an [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]] on $S$.
By definition, a [[Definition:Preordering|preordering]] on $S$ is a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$ which is: :$(1): \quad$ [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] and: :$(2): \quad$ [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. Thus $\RR$ is a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on $S$ which is [[D...
Antisymmetric Preordering is Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Antisymmetric_Preordering_is_Ordering
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Antisymmetric_Preordering_is_Ordering
[ "Preorderings", "Orderings", "Asymmetric Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Preordering", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Ordering" ]
[ "Definition:Preordering", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Ordering" ]
proofwiki-8438
Relation is Antisymmetric and Reflexive iff Intersection with Inverse equals Diagonal Relation
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation on a set $S$. Then $\RR$ is both antisymmetric and reflexive {{iff}}: :$\RR \cap \RR^{-1} = \Delta_S$ where $\Delta_S$ denotes the diagonal relation.
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR$ be both antisymmetric and reflexive. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \RR \cap \RR^{-1} | o = \subseteq | r = \Delta_S | c = Relation is Antisymmetric iff Intersection with Inverse is Coreflexive }} {{eqn | l = \RR | o = \supseteq | r = \Delta_S |...
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Then $\RR$ is both [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]] and [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] {{iff}}: :$\RR \cap \RR^{-1} = \Delta_S$ where $\Delta_S$ denotes the [[Definition:Diagonal R...
=== Necessary Condition === Let $\RR$ be both [[Definition:Antisymmetric Relation|antisymmetric]] and [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]]. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \RR \cap \RR^{-1} | o = \subseteq | r = \Delta_S | c = [[Relation is Antisymmetric iff Intersection with Inverse is Coref...
Relation is Antisymmetric and Reflexive iff Intersection with Inverse equals Diagonal Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Antisymmetric_and_Reflexive_iff_Intersection_with_Inverse_equals_Diagonal_Relation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Relation_is_Antisymmetric_and_Reflexive_iff_Intersection_with_Inverse_equals_Diagonal_Relation
[ "Reflexive Relations", "Antisymmetric Relations", "Inverse Relations", "Diagonal Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Diagonal Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Relation is Antisymmetric iff Intersection with Inverse is Coreflexive", "Inverse of Reflexive Relation is Reflexive", "Intersection is Largest Subset", "Relation is Antisymmetric iff Intersection with Inverse is Coreflexive", "Defin...
proofwiki-8439
Reflexive and Transitive Relation is Idempotent
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation on a set $S$. Let $\RR$ be both reflexive and transitive. Then $\RR$ is idempotent, in the sense that: :$\RR \circ \RR = \RR$ where $\circ$ denotes composition of relations.
Let $\RR$ be both reflexive and transitive. By definition of transitive relation: :$\RR \circ \RR \subseteq \RR$ Let $\tuple {x, y} \in \RR$. By definition of reflexive relation: :$\tuple {y, y} \in \RR$ By definition of composition of relations: :$\tuple {x, y} \in \RR \circ \RR$ Hence: :$\RR \subseteq \RR \circ \RR$...
Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Endorelation|relation]] on a [[Definition:Set|set]] $S$. Let $\RR$ be both [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] and [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. Then $\RR$ is [[Definition:Idempotent Relation|idempotent]], in the sense that: :$\RR \circ \RR =...
Let $\RR$ be both [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] and [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]]. By definition of [[Definition:Transitive Relation/Definition 2|transitive relation]]: :$\RR \circ \RR \subseteq \RR$ Let $\tuple {x, y} \in \RR$. By definition of [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflex...
Reflexive and Transitive Relation is Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_and_Transitive_Relation_is_Idempotent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Reflexive_and_Transitive_Relation_is_Idempotent
[ "Reflexive Relations", "Transitive Relations", "Idempotence" ]
[ "Definition:Endorelation", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Idempotence/Relation", "Definition:Composition of Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation/Definition 2", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Composition of Relations", "Definition:Set Equality/Definition 2" ]
proofwiki-8440
Equivalence of Definitions of Ordering/Proof 2
The following definitions of ordering are equivalent:
=== Definition 1 implies Definition 2 === Let $\RR$ be a relation on $S$ satisfying: {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | lc= $\RR$ is reflexive | q = \forall a \in S | m = a \mathrel \RR a }} {{axiom | n = 2 | lc= $\RR$ is transitive | q = \forall a, b, c \in S | m = a \mat...
The following definitions of [[Definition:Ordering|ordering]] are equivalent:
=== [[Definition:Ordering/Definition 1|Definition 1]] implies [[Definition:Ordering/Definition 2|Definition 2]] === Let $\RR$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] on $S$ satisfying: {{begin-axiom}} {{axiom | n = 1 | lc= $\RR$ is [[Definition:Reflexive Relation|reflexive]] | q = \forall a \in S ...
Equivalence of Definitions of Ordering/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Ordering/Proof_2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Equivalence_of_Definitions_of_Ordering/Proof_2
[ "Equivalence of Definitions of Ordering" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering" ]
[ "Definition:Ordering/Definition 1", "Definition:Ordering/Definition 2", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Reflexive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antisymmetric Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Reflexivity", "Definition:Composition of Relations", ...
proofwiki-8441
Image of Domain of Relation is Image Set
Let $S$ and $T$ be sets. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a relation. The image of the domain of $\RR$ is the image set of $\RR$: :$\RR \sqbrk {\Dom \RR} = \Img \RR$ where $\Img \RR$ is the image of $\RR$.
Let $y \in \RR \sqbrk {\Dom \RR}$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = y | o = \in | r = \RR \sqbrk {\Dom \RR} | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \exists x \in \Dom \RR | l = \tuple {x, y} | o = \in | r = \RR | c = {{Defof|Image of Subset under Relation}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto ...
Let $S$ and $T$ be [[Definition:Set|sets]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times T$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]]. The [[Definition:Image of Subset under Relation|image]] of the [[Definition:Domain of Relation|domain]] of $\RR$ is the [[Definition:Image of Relation|image set of $\RR$]]: :$\RR \sqbrk {\Dom \RR} = \Im...
Let $y \in \RR \sqbrk {\Dom \RR}$. {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = y | o = \in | r = \RR \sqbrk {\Dom \RR} | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | q = \exists x \in \Dom \RR | l = \tuple {x, y} | o = \in | r = \RR | c = {{Defof|Image of Subset under Relation}} }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto...
Image of Domain of Relation is Image Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Domain_of_Relation_is_Image_Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Image_of_Domain_of_Relation_is_Image_Set
[ "Relation Theory" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Relation/Subset", "Definition:Domain (Set Theory)/Relation", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Relation/Relation", "Definition:Image (Set Theory)/Relation/Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Set Equality", "Category:Relation Theory" ]
proofwiki-8442
Condition for Relation to be Transitive and Antitransitive
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation in $S$. Then: :$\RR$ is both transitive and antitransitive {{iff}}: :$\neg \paren {\exists x, y, z \in S: x \mathrel \RR y \land y \mathrel \RR z}$
=== Necessary Condition === Suppose $\neg \paren {\exists x, y, z \in S: x \mathrel \RR y \land y \mathrel \RR z}$. Then $\RR$ is both transitive and antitransitive vacuously. {{qed|lemma}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] in $S$. Then: :$\RR$ is both [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]] and [[Definition:Antitransitive Relation|antitransitive]] {{iff}}: :$\neg \paren {\exists x, y, z \in S: x \mathrel \RR y \land y \mathr...
=== Necessary Condition === Suppose $\neg \paren {\exists x, y, z \in S: x \mathrel \RR y \land y \mathrel \RR z}$. Then $\RR$ is both [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]] and [[Definition:Antitransitive Relation|antitransitive]] [[Definition:Vacuous Truth|vacuously]]. {{qed|lemma}}
Condition for Relation to be Transitive and Antitransitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_for_Relation_to_be_Transitive_and_Antitransitive
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Condition_for_Relation_to_be_Transitive_and_Antitransitive
[ "Transitive Relations", "Antitransitive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antitransitive Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antitransitive Relation", "Definition:Vacuous Truth", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antitransitive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antitransitive Relation" ]
proofwiki-8443
Transitive and Antitransitive Relation is Asymmetric
Let $S$ be a set. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a relation in $S$. Let $\RR$ be both transitive and antitransitive. Then $\RR$ is asymmetric.
Let $\tuple {x, y} \in \RR$ for some $x, y \in S$. Then as $\RR$ is antitransitive: :$\tuple {x, x} \notin \RR$ and so as $\RR$ is transitive and $\tuple {x, x} \notin \RR$: :$\tuple {y, x} \notin \RR$ That is, $\RR$ is asymmetric. {{qed}}
Let $S$ be a [[Definition:Set|set]]. Let $\RR \subseteq S \times S$ be a [[Definition:Relation|relation]] in $S$. Let $\RR$ be both [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]] and [[Definition:Antitransitive Relation|antitransitive]]. Then $\RR$ is [[Definition:Asymmetric Relation|asymmetric]].
Let $\tuple {x, y} \in \RR$ for some $x, y \in S$. Then as $\RR$ is [[Definition:Antitransitive Relation|antitransitive]]: :$\tuple {x, x} \notin \RR$ and so as $\RR$ is [[Definition:Transitive Relation|transitive]] and $\tuple {x, x} \notin \RR$: :$\tuple {y, x} \notin \RR$ That is, $\RR$ is [[Definition:Asymmetric...
Transitive and Antitransitive Relation is Asymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_and_Antitransitive_Relation_is_Asymmetric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Transitive_and_Antitransitive_Relation_is_Asymmetric
[ "Asymmetric Relations", "Transitive Relations", "Antitransitive Relations" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Antitransitive Relation", "Definition:Asymmetric Relation" ]
[ "Definition:Antitransitive Relation", "Definition:Transitive Relation", "Definition:Asymmetric Relation" ]
proofwiki-8444
Valid Syllogism in Figure I needs Affirmative Minor Premise and Universal Major Premise
Let $Q$ be a valid categorical syllogism in Figure $\text I$. Then it is a necessary condition that: :The major premise of $Q$ be a universal categorical statement and :The minor premise of $Q$ be an affirmative categorical statement.
Consider Figure $\text I$: {{:Definition:First Figure of Categorical Syllogism}} Let the major premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the minor premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Min}$. Let the conclusion of $Q$ be denoted $\text{C}$. $M$ is: :the subject of $\text{Maj}$ :the predicate of $\text{Min}$. So, in order ...
Let $Q$ be a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] [[Definition:Categorical Syllogism|categorical syllogism]] in [[Definition:First Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text I$]]. Then it is a [[Definition:Necessary Condition|necessary condition]] that: :The [[Definition:Major Premise of Syllogism|major premise]] of...
Consider [[Definition:First Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text I$]]: {{:Definition:First Figure of Categorical Syllogism}} Let the [[Definition:Major Premise of Syllogism|major premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the [[Definition:Minor Premise of Syllogism|minor premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\tex...
Valid Syllogism in Figure I needs Affirmative Minor Premise and Universal Major Premise
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogism_in_Figure_I_needs_Affirmative_Minor_Premise_and_Universal_Major_Premise
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogism_in_Figure_I_needs_Affirmative_Minor_Premise_and_Universal_Major_Premise
[ "Categorical Syllogisms" ]
[ "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism", "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/I", "Definition:Conditional/Necessary Condition", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Major Premise", "Definition:Universal Categorical Statement", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premis...
[ "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/I", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Major Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Minor Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Conclusion", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Subject", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Predicate", "...
proofwiki-8445
Valid Syllogism in Figure II needs Negative Conclusion and Universal Major Premise
Let $Q$ be a valid categorical syllogism in Figure $\text{II}$. Then it is a necessary condition that: :The major premise of $Q$ be a universal categorical statement and :The conclusion of $Q$ be a negative categorical statement.
Consider Figure $\text{II}$: {{:Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/II}} Let the major premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the minor premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Min}$. Let the conclusion of $Q$ be denoted $\text{C}$. $M$ is: :the predicate of $\text{Maj}$ :the predicate of $\text{Min}$. So, in order...
Let $Q$ be a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] [[Definition:Categorical Syllogism|categorical syllogism]] in [[Definition:Second Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text{II}$]]. Then it is a [[Definition:Necessary Condition|necessary condition]] that: :The [[Definition:Major Premise of Syllogism|major premise]]...
Consider [[Definition:Second Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text{II}$]]: {{:Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/II}} Let the [[Definition:Major Premise of Syllogism|major premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the [[Definition:Minor Premise of Syllogism|minor premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\tex...
Valid Syllogism in Figure II needs Negative Conclusion and Universal Major Premise
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogism_in_Figure_II_needs_Negative_Conclusion_and_Universal_Major_Premise
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogism_in_Figure_II_needs_Negative_Conclusion_and_Universal_Major_Premise
[ "Categorical Syllogisms" ]
[ "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism", "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/II", "Definition:Conditional/Necessary Condition", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Major Premise", "Definition:Universal Categorical Statement", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Concl...
[ "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/II", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Major Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Minor Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Conclusion", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Predicate", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Predicate", ...
proofwiki-8446
Valid Syllogism in Figure III needs Particular Conclusion and if Negative then Negative Major Premise
Let $Q$ be a valid categorical syllogism in Figure $\text {III}$. Then it is a necessary condition that: :The conclusion of $Q$ be a particular categorical statement and: :If the conclusion of $Q$ be a negative categorical statement, then so is the major premise of $Q$.
Consider Figure $\text {III}$: {{:Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/III}} Let the major premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the minor premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Min}$. Let the conclusion of $Q$ be denoted $\text{C}$. $M$ is: :the subject of $\text{Maj}$ :the subject of $\text{Min}$. So, in order ...
Let $Q$ be a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] [[Definition:Categorical Syllogism|categorical syllogism]] in [[Definition:Third Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text {III}$]]. Then it is a [[Definition:Necessary Condition|necessary condition]] that: :The [[Definition:Conclusion of Syllogism|conclusion]] of $...
Consider [[Definition:Third Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text {III}$]]: {{:Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/III}} Let the [[Definition:Major Premise of Syllogism|major premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the [[Definition:Minor Premise of Syllogism|minor premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\t...
Valid Syllogism in Figure III needs Particular Conclusion and if Negative then Negative Major Premise
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogism_in_Figure_III_needs_Particular_Conclusion_and_if_Negative_then_Negative_Major_Premise
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogism_in_Figure_III_needs_Particular_Conclusion_and_if_Negative_then_Negative_Major_Premise
[ "Categorical Syllogisms" ]
[ "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism", "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/III", "Definition:Conditional/Necessary Condition", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Conclusion", "Definition:Particular Categorical Statement", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Conclusion", ...
[ "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/III", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Major Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Minor Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Conclusion", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Subject", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Subject", "...
proofwiki-8447
Valid Syllogisms in Figure IV
Let $Q$ be a valid categorical syllogism in Figure $\text {IV}$. Then it is a necessary condition that: :$(1): \quad$ Either: :: the major premise of $Q$ be a negative categorical statement :or: :: the minor premise of $Q$ be a universal categorical statement :or both. :$(2): \quad$ If the conclusion of $Q$ be a negati...
Consider Figure $\text {IV}$: {{:Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/IV}} Let the major premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the minor premise of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Min}$. Let the conclusion of $Q$ be denoted $\text{C}$. $M$ is: :the predicate of $\text{Maj}$ :the subject of $\text{Min}$. We have: :Mid...
Let $Q$ be a [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]] [[Definition:Categorical Syllogism|categorical syllogism]] in [[Definition:Fourth Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text {IV}$]]. Then it is a [[Definition:Necessary Condition|necessary condition]] that: :$(1): \quad$ Either: :: the [[Definition:Major Premise of...
Consider [[Definition:Fourth Figure of Categorical Syllogism|Figure $\text {IV}$]]: {{:Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/IV}} Let the [[Definition:Major Premise of Syllogism|major premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\text{Maj}$. Let the [[Definition:Minor Premise of Syllogism|minor premise]] of $Q$ be denoted $\te...
Valid Syllogisms in Figure IV
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogisms_in_Figure_IV
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Valid_Syllogisms_in_Figure_IV
[ "Categorical Syllogisms" ]
[ "Definition:Valid Argument", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism", "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/IV", "Definition:Conditional/Necessary Condition", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Major Premise", "Definition:Negative Categorical Statement", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premis...
[ "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism/IV", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Major Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Premises/Minor Premise", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism/Conclusion", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Predicate", "Definition:Categorical Statement/Subject", ...
proofwiki-8448
Elimination of all but 24 Categorical Syllogisms as Invalid
Of the $256$ different types of categorical syllogism, all but $24$ can be identified as invalid. These are the $24$ patterns which may still be valid: :$\begin{array}{rl} \text{I} & AAA \\ \text{I} & AII \\ \text{I} & EAE \\ \text{I} & EIO \\ \text{I} & AAI \\ \text{I} & EAO \\ \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{rl} \te...
From Elimination of all but 48 Categorical Syllogisms as Invalid there are $12$ possible patterns of categorical syllogism per figure: :$\begin{array}{cccccc} AAA & AAI & AEE & AEO & AII & AOO \\ EAE & EAO & EIO & IAI & IEO & OAO \\ \end{array}$
Of the $256$ different types of [[Definition:Categorical Syllogism|categorical syllogism]], all but $24$ can be identified as [[Definition:Invalid Argument|invalid]]. These are the $24$ patterns which may still be [[Definition:Valid Argument|valid]]: :$\begin{array}{rl} \text{I} & AAA \\ \text{I} & AII \\ \text{I} &...
From [[Elimination of all but 48 Categorical Syllogisms as Invalid]] there are $12$ possible patterns of [[Definition:Categorical Syllogism|categorical syllogism]] per [[Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism|figure]]: :$\begin{array}{cccccc} AAA & AAI & AEE & AEO & AII & AOO \\ EAE & EAO & EIO & IAI & IEO & OAO \...
Elimination of all but 24 Categorical Syllogisms as Invalid
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Elimination_of_all_but_24_Categorical_Syllogisms_as_Invalid
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Elimination_of_all_but_24_Categorical_Syllogisms_as_Invalid
[ "Categorical Syllogisms" ]
[ "Definition:Categorical Syllogism", "Definition:Invalid Argument", "Definition:Valid Argument" ]
[ "Elimination of all but 48 Categorical Syllogisms as Invalid", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism", "Definition:Figure of Categorical Syllogism", "Definition:Categorical Syllogism" ]
proofwiki-8449
Extension of Contradictory Branch is Contradictory
Let $T$ be a propositional tableau. Let $\Gamma$ be a contradictory branch of $T$. Let $\Gamma'$ be an extension of $\Gamma$. Then $\Gamma'$ is also contradictory.
Since $\Gamma$ is contradictory, there is some WFF $\mathbf A$ such that both $\mathbf A$ and $\neg \mathbf A$ occur along $\Gamma$. Since $\Gamma'$ is an extension of $\Gamma$, $\mathbf A$ and $\neg \mathbf A$ also occur along $\Gamma'$. Hence $\Gamma'$ is contradictory. {{qed}} Category:Propositional Tableaux 50yd024...
Let $T$ be a [[Definition:Propositional Tableau|propositional tableau]]. Let $\Gamma$ be a [[Definition:Contradictory Branch|contradictory branch]] of $T$. Let $\Gamma'$ be an [[Definition:Extension of Branch of Propositional Tableau|extension]] of $\Gamma$. Then $\Gamma'$ is also [[Definition:Contradictory Branch|...
Since $\Gamma$ is [[Definition:Contradictory Branch|contradictory]], there is some [[Definition:WFF of Propositional Logic|WFF]] $\mathbf A$ such that both $\mathbf A$ and $\neg \mathbf A$ [[Definition:Occurrence along Branch|occur]] along $\Gamma$. Since $\Gamma'$ is an [[Definition:Extension of Branch of Proposition...
Extension of Contradictory Branch is Contradictory
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Extension_of_Contradictory_Branch_is_Contradictory
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Extension_of_Contradictory_Branch_is_Contradictory
[ "Propositional Tableaux" ]
[ "Definition:Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Contradictory/Branch", "Definition:Extension of Branch of Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Contradictory/Branch" ]
[ "Definition:Contradictory/Branch", "Definition:Language of Propositional Logic/Formal Grammar/WFF", "Definition:Labeled Tree for Propositional Logic/Along a Branch", "Definition:Extension of Branch of Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Labeled Tree for Propositional Logic/Along a Branch", "Definition:Con...
proofwiki-8450
Finished Propositional Tableau has Finished Branch or is Confutation
Let $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$ be a finished propositional tableau. Then one of the following holds: :$T$ has a finished branch :$T$ is a tableau confutation.
Suppose $T$ has no finished branch. Then since $T$ is finished, every branch of $T$ is contradictory. Hence $T$ is a tableau confutation. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {T, \mathbf H, \Phi}$ be a [[Definition:Finished Propositional Tableau|finished]] [[Definition:Propositional Tableau|propositional tableau]]. Then one of the following holds: :$T$ has a [[Definition:Finished Branch of Propositional Tableau|finished branch]] :$T$ is a [[Definition:Tableau Confutation|tab...
Suppose $T$ has no [[Definition:Finished Branch of Propositional Tableau|finished branch]]. Then since $T$ is [[Definition:Finished Propositional Tableau|finished]], every [[Definition:Branch (Graph Theory)|branch]] of $T$ is [[Definition:Contradictory Branch|contradictory]]. Hence $T$ is a [[Definition:Tableau Conf...
Finished Propositional Tableau has Finished Branch or is Confutation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finished_Propositional_Tableau_has_Finished_Branch_or_is_Confutation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Finished_Propositional_Tableau_has_Finished_Branch_or_is_Confutation
[ "Propositional Tableaux" ]
[ "Definition:Finished Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Finished Branch of Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Tableau Confutation" ]
[ "Definition:Finished Branch of Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Finished Propositional Tableau", "Definition:Rooted Tree/Branch", "Definition:Contradictory/Branch", "Definition:Tableau Confutation" ]
proofwiki-8451
Alternating Harmonic Series is Conditionally Convergent
The alternating harmonic series: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1} } n = 1 - \frac 1 2 + \frac 1 3 - \frac 1 4 + \cdots$ is conditionally convergent.
Note first that: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {\frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1} } n} = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac 1 n$ which is divergent by Harmonic Series is Divergent. Hence by definition $\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {\frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1} } n}$ is not '''absolutely convergen...
The [[Definition:Alternating Harmonic Series|alternating harmonic series]]: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1} } n = 1 - \frac 1 2 + \frac 1 3 - \frac 1 4 + \cdots$ is [[Definition:Conditionally Convergent Series|conditionally convergent]].
Note first that: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {\frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1} } n} = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac 1 n$ which is [[Definition:Divergent Series|divergent]] by [[Harmonic Series is Divergent]]. Hence by definition $\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {\frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1...
Alternating Harmonic Series is Conditionally Convergent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Alternating_Harmonic_Series_is_Conditionally_Convergent
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Alternating_Harmonic_Series_is_Conditionally_Convergent
[ "Alternating Series", "Series", "Newton-Mercator Series" ]
[ "Definition:Mercator's Constant", "Definition:Conditionally Convergent Series" ]
[ "Definition:Divergent Series", "Harmonic Series is Divergent", "Definition:Absolutely Convergent Series/Real Numbers", "Definition:Basic Null Sequence", "Reciprocal Sequence is Strictly Decreasing", "Alternating Series Test" ]
proofwiki-8452
Manipulation of Absolutely Convergent Series/Permutation
If $\pi: \N \to \N$ is a permutation of $N$, then: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_{\map \pi n}$
Let $\epsilon > 0$. From Tail of Convergent Series tends to Zero, it follows that there exists $N \in \N$ such that: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = N}^\infty \size {a_n} < \epsilon$ By definition, a permutation is bijective. Hence we can find $M \in \N$ such that: :$\set {1, \ldots, N - 1} \subseteq \set {\map \pi 1, \ldots, ...
If $\pi: \N \to \N$ is a [[Definition:Permutation|permutation]] of $N$, then: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_{\map \pi n}$
Let $\epsilon > 0$. From [[Tail of Convergent Series tends to Zero]], it follows that there exists $N \in \N$ such that: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = N}^\infty \size {a_n} < \epsilon$ By definition, a [[Definition:Permutation|permutation]] is [[Definition:Bijection|bijective]]. Hence we can find $M \in \N$ such that: :$...
Manipulation of Absolutely Convergent Series/Permutation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Manipulation_of_Absolutely_Convergent_Series/Permutation
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Manipulation_of_Absolutely_Convergent_Series/Permutation
[ "Convergence", "Series" ]
[ "Definition:Permutation" ]
[ "Tail of Convergent Series tends to Zero", "Definition:Permutation", "Definition:Bijection", "Definition:Characteristic Function (Set Theory)/Set", "Triangle Inequality", "Definition:Convergent Series" ]
proofwiki-8453
Manipulation of Absolutely Convergent Series/Characteristic Function
Let $A \subseteq \N$. Then: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n \map {\chi_A} n = \sum_{n \mathop \in A} a_n$ where $\chi_A$ is the characteristic function of $A$.
For all $N \in \N$, we have: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \size {a_n \map {\chi_A} n} \le \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \size {a_n} \le \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {a_n}$ It follows that: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {a_n \map {\chi_A} n} \le \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {a_n}$ Then $\ds \sum_{n \mathop ...
Let $A \subseteq \N$. Then: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n \map {\chi_A} n = \sum_{n \mathop \in A} a_n$ where $\chi_A$ is the [[Definition:Characteristic Function of Set|characteristic function]] of $A$.
For all $N \in \N$, we have: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \size {a_n \map {\chi_A} n} \le \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \size {a_n} \le \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {a_n}$ It follows that: :$\ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {a_n \map {\chi_A} n} \le \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \size {a_n}$ Then $\ds \sum_{n \math...
Manipulation of Absolutely Convergent Series/Characteristic Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Manipulation_of_Absolutely_Convergent_Series/Characteristic_Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Manipulation_of_Absolutely_Convergent_Series/Characteristic_Function
[ "Series", "Convergence" ]
[ "Definition:Characteristic Function (Set Theory)/Set" ]
[ "Definition:Absolutely Convergent Series", "Manipulation of Absolutely Convergent Series/Permutation", "Definition:Series", "Category:Series", "Category:Convergence" ]
proofwiki-8454
Manipulation of Absolutely Convergent Series/Scale Factor
Let $c \in \R$, or $c \in \C$. Then: :$\ds c \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty c a_n$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = c \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n | r = c \lim_{N \mathop \to \infty} \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N a_n }} {{eqn | r = \lim_{N \mathop \to \infty} \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N c a_n | c = Multiple Rule for Sequences }} {{eqn | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty c a_n }} {{end-eqn}} {{qed}} Categor...
Let $c \in \R$, or $c \in \C$. Then: :$\ds c \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty c a_n$
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = c \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty a_n | r = c \lim_{N \mathop \to \infty} \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N a_n }} {{eqn | r = \lim_{N \mathop \to \infty} \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N c a_n | c = [[Multiple Rule for Sequences]] }} {{eqn | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty c a_n }} {{end-eqn}} {{qed}} [[...
Manipulation of Absolutely Convergent Series/Scale Factor
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Manipulation_of_Absolutely_Convergent_Series/Scale_Factor
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Manipulation_of_Absolutely_Convergent_Series/Scale_Factor
[ "Series", "Convergence" ]
[]
[ "Combination Theorem for Sequences/Multiple Rule", "Category:Series", "Category:Convergence" ]
proofwiki-8455
Binomial Coefficient with Self minus One
:$\forall n \in \N_{>0}: \dbinom n {n - 1} = n$
The case where $n = 1$ can be taken separately. From Binomial Coefficient with Zero: :$\dbinom 1 0 = 1$ demonstrating that the result holds for $n = 1$. Let $n \in \N: n > 1$. From the definition of binomial coefficients: :$\dbinom n {n - 1} = \dfrac {n!} {\paren {n - 1}! \paren {n - \paren {n - 1} }!} = \dfrac {n!} {\...
:$\forall n \in \N_{>0}: \dbinom n {n - 1} = n$
The case where $n = 1$ can be taken separately. From [[Binomial Coefficient with Zero]]: :$\dbinom 1 0 = 1$ demonstrating that the result holds for $n = 1$. Let $n \in \N: n > 1$. From the [[Definition:Binomial Coefficient|definition of binomial coefficients]]: :$\dbinom n {n - 1} = \dfrac {n!} {\paren {n - 1}! \p...
Binomial Coefficient with Self minus One/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Binomial_Coefficient_with_Self_minus_One
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Binomial_Coefficient_with_Self_minus_One/Proof_1
[ "Examples of Binomial Coefficients", "Binomial Coefficient with Self minus One" ]
[]
[ "Binomial Coefficient with Zero", "Definition:Binomial Coefficient", "Definition:Factorial" ]
proofwiki-8456
Binomial Coefficient with Self minus One
:$\forall n \in \N_{>0}: \dbinom n {n - 1} = n$
From Cardinality of Set of Subsets, $\dbinom n {n - 1}$ is the number of combination of things taken $n - 1$ at a time. Choosing $n - 1$ things from $n$ is the same thing as choosing which $1$ of the elements to be left out. There are $n$ different choices for that $1$ element. Therefore there are $n$ ways to choose $n...
:$\forall n \in \N_{>0}: \dbinom n {n - 1} = n$
From [[Cardinality of Set of Subsets]], $\dbinom n {n - 1}$ is the number of combination of things taken $n - 1$ at a time. Choosing $n - 1$ things from $n$ is the same thing as choosing which $1$ of the elements to be left out. There are $n$ different choices for that $1$ element. Therefore there are $n$ ways to ch...
Binomial Coefficient with Self minus One/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Binomial_Coefficient_with_Self_minus_One
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Binomial_Coefficient_with_Self_minus_One/Proof_2
[ "Examples of Binomial Coefficients", "Binomial Coefficient with Self minus One" ]
[]
[ "Cardinality of Set of Subsets" ]
proofwiki-8457
Definite Integral of Uniformly Convergent Series of Continuous Functions
Let $\sequence {f_n}$ be a sequence of real functions. Let each of $\sequence {f_n}$ be continuous on the interval $\hointr a b$. {{explain|Investigation needed as to whether there is a mistake in {{BookReference|Special Functions of Mathematics for Engineers|1992|Larry C. Andrews|ed = 2nd|edpage = Second Edition}} -- ...
Define $\map {S_N} x = \ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \map {f_n} x$. We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \size {\int_a^b \map f x \rd x - \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \int_a^b \map {f_n} x \rd x} | r = \size {\int_a^b \paren {\map f x - \map {S_N} x} \rd x} | c = }} {{eqn | o = \le | r = \paren {b - a} \sup_{x ...
Let $\sequence {f_n}$ be a [[Definition:Sequence|sequence]] of [[Definition:Real Function|real functions]]. Let each of $\sequence {f_n}$ be [[Definition:Continuous on Interval|continuous]] on the [[Definition:Half-Open Real Interval|interval]] $\hointr a b$. {{explain|Investigation needed as to whether there is a mi...
Define $\map {S_N} x = \ds \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \map {f_n} x$. We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \size {\int_a^b \map f x \rd x - \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^N \int_a^b \map {f_n} x \rd x} | r = \size {\int_a^b \paren {\map f x - \map {S_N} x} \rd x} | c = }} {{eqn | o = \le | r = \paren {b - a} \sup_{x...
Definite Integral of Uniformly Convergent Series of Continuous Functions
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definite_Integral_of_Uniformly_Convergent_Series_of_Continuous_Functions
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definite_Integral_of_Uniformly_Convergent_Series_of_Continuous_Functions
[ "Integral Calculus", "Convergence", "Continuity", "Series" ]
[ "Definition:Sequence", "Definition:Real Function", "Definition:Continuous Real Function/Interval", "Definition:Real Interval/Half-Open", "Definition:Series", "Definition:Uniform Convergence" ]
[]
proofwiki-8458
Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence
Let $\ds S := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a power series about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the radius of convergence of $S$. Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. Then $S$ is uniformly convergent on $D = \set {x: \size {x - \xi} \le \rho}$.
We shall make use of the Weierstrass M-Test to prove this result. To begin with, for each $n \in N$, define for $x \in D$: :$\map {f_n} x = a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \size {\map {f_n} x} | r = \size {a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n} }} {{eqn | o = \le | r = \size {a_n \rho^n} |...
Let $\ds S := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a [[Definition:Power Series|power series]] about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the [[Definition:Radius of Convergence|radius of convergence]] of $S$. Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. Then $S$ is [[Definition:Uniform Convergence|uniformly ...
We shall make use of the [[Weierstrass M-Test]] to prove this result. To begin with, for each $n \in N$, define for $x \in D$: :$\map {f_n} x = a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ We have: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \size {\map {f_n} x} | r = \size {a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n} }} {{eqn | o = \le | r = \size {a_n \rho^n} ...
Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Converges_Uniformly_within_Radius_of_Convergence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Converges_Uniformly_within_Radius_of_Convergence
[ "Power Series" ]
[ "Definition:Power Series", "Definition:Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Uniform Convergence" ]
[ "Weierstrass M-Test", "Definition:Upper Bound of Mapping/Real-Valued", "Definition:Supremum of Set", "Weierstrass M-Test", "Definition:Convergent Series", "Definition:Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Interval of Convergence", "Definition:Convergent Series", "Existence of Interval of Convergence o...
proofwiki-8459
Power Series Converges to Continuous Function
Let $\ds \map f x := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a power series about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the radius of convergence of $S$. Then $\map f x$ is a continuous function on $\set {x: \size {x - \xi} < R}$.
Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. From Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence, $\map f x$ is uniformly convergent on $\set {x: \size {x - \xi} \le \rho}$. From Real Polynomial Function is Continuous, each of $\map {f_n} x = a_n x^n$ is a continuous function of $x$. The result follows ...
Let $\ds \map f x := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a [[Definition:Power Series|power series]] about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the [[Definition:Radius of Convergence|radius of convergence]] of $S$. Then $\map f x$ is a [[Definition:Continuous Function|continuous function]] on $\set {x: \size ...
Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. From [[Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence]], $\map f x$ is [[Definition:Uniform Convergence|uniformly convergent]] on $\set {x: \size {x - \xi} \le \rho}$. From [[Real Polynomial Function is Continuous]], each of $\map {f_n} x = a_n x^n$ is a [[...
Power Series Converges to Continuous Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Converges_to_Continuous_Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Converges_to_Continuous_Function
[ "Power Series" ]
[ "Definition:Power Series", "Definition:Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Continuous Function" ]
[ "Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Uniform Convergence", "Real Polynomial Function is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Function", "Uniformly Convergent Series of Continuous Functions is Continuous" ]
proofwiki-8460
Power Series is Termwise Integrable within Radius of Convergence
Let $\ds \map f x := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a power series about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the radius of convergence of $S$. Then: :$\ds \int_a^b \map f x \rd x = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \int_a^b a_n x^n \rd x = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \frac {x^{n + 1} } {n + 1}$
Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. From Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence, $\map f x$ is uniformly convergent on $\set {x: \size {x - \xi} \le \rho}$. From Real Polynomial Function is Continuous, each of $\map {f_n} x = a_n x^n$ is a continuous function of $x$. Then from Definite ...
Let $\ds \map f x := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a [[Definition:Power Series|power series]] about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the [[Definition:Radius of Convergence|radius of convergence]] of $S$. Then: :$\ds \int_a^b \map f x \rd x = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \int_a^b a_n x^n \rd x = \sum...
Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. From [[Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence]], $\map f x$ is [[Definition:Uniform Convergence|uniformly convergent]] on $\set {x: \size {x - \xi} \le \rho}$. From [[Real Polynomial Function is Continuous]], each of $\map {f_n} x = a_n x^n$ is a [[...
Power Series is Termwise Integrable within Radius of Convergence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_is_Termwise_Integrable_within_Radius_of_Convergence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_is_Termwise_Integrable_within_Radius_of_Convergence
[ "Power Series" ]
[ "Definition:Power Series", "Definition:Radius of Convergence" ]
[ "Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Uniform Convergence", "Real Polynomial Function is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Function", "Definite Integral of Uniformly Convergent Series of Continuous Functions", "Integral of Power" ]
proofwiki-8461
Power Series is Termwise Differentiable within Radius of Convergence
Let $\ds \map f x := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a power series about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the radius of convergence of the series. Then: :$\ds \frac \d {\d x} \map f x = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \frac \d {\d x} a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty n a_n \paren {x - \...
Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. From Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence, $\map f x$ is uniformly convergent on $\set {x: \size {x - \xi} \le \rho}$. From Real Polynomial Function is Continuous, each of $\map {f_n} x = a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ is a continuous function of $x$. From...
Let $\ds \map f x := \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty a_n \paren {x - \xi}^n$ be a [[Definition:Power Series|power series]] about a point $\xi$. Let $R$ be the [[Definition:Radius of Convergence|radius of convergence]] of the series. Then: :$\ds \frac \d {\d x} \map f x = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \frac \d {\d x} a_n \...
Let $\rho \in \R$ such that $0 \le \rho < R$. From [[Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence]], $\map f x$ is [[Definition:Uniform Convergence|uniformly convergent]] on $\set {x: \size {x - \xi} \le \rho}$. From [[Real Polynomial Function is Continuous]], each of $\map {f_n} x = a_n \paren {x - ...
Power Series is Termwise Differentiable within Radius of Convergence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_is_Termwise_Differentiable_within_Radius_of_Convergence
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_is_Termwise_Differentiable_within_Radius_of_Convergence
[ "Power Series" ]
[ "Definition:Power Series", "Definition:Radius of Convergence" ]
[ "Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Uniform Convergence", "Real Polynomial Function is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Function", "Power Rule for Derivatives", "Real Polynomial Function is Continuous", "Definition:Continuous Function", "Derivative of Unifor...
proofwiki-8462
Power Series Expansion for Logarithm of 1 + x
The Newton-Mercator series defines the natural logarithm function as a power series expansion: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \ln {1 + x} | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \paren {-1}^{n - 1} \frac {x^n} n }} {{eqn | r = x - \frac {x^2} 2 + \frac {x^3} 3 - \frac {x^4} 4 + \cdots }} {{end-eqn}} valid for all $x \...
From Sum of Infinite Geometric Sequence, putting $-x$ for $x$: :$(1): \quad \ds \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \paren {-x}^n = \frac 1 {1 + x}$ for $-1 < x < 1$. From Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence, $(1)$ is uniformly convergent on every closed interval within the interval $\openint {-1} 1$....
The [[Definition:Newton-Mercator Series|Newton-Mercator series]] defines the [[Definition:Natural Logarithm|natural logarithm function]] as a [[Definition:Power Series|power series expansion]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \ln {1 + x} | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \paren {-1}^{n - 1} \frac {x^n} n }} {{eq...
From [[Sum of Infinite Geometric Sequence]], putting $-x$ for $x$: :$(1): \quad \ds \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \paren {-x}^n = \frac 1 {1 + x}$ for $-1 < x < 1$. From [[Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence]], $(1)$ is [[Definition:Uniform Convergence|uniformly convergent]] on every [[Definit...
Power Series Expansion for Logarithm of 1 + x/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Expansion_for_Logarithm_of_1_+_x
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Expansion_for_Logarithm_of_1_+_x/Proof_1
[ "Power Series Expansion for Logarithm of 1 + x", "Examples of Power Series", "Logarithms", "Newton-Mercator Series", "Taylor Series" ]
[ "Definition:Newton-Mercator Series", "Definition:Natural Logarithm", "Definition:Power Series" ]
[ "Sum of Infinite Geometric Sequence", "Power Series Converges Uniformly within Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Uniform Convergence", "Definition:Real Interval/Closed", "Definition:Real Interval/Open", "Power Series is Termwise Integrable within Radius of Convergence", "Definition:Primitive (Calculus...
proofwiki-8463
Newton-Mercator Series/Examples/2
The Newton-Mercator Series for $x = 1$ converges to the natural logarithm of $2$: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1} } n | r = 1 - \frac 1 2 + \frac 1 3 - \frac 1 4 + \dotsb | c = }} {{eqn | r = \ln 2 | c = }} {{end-eqn}} This real number is known...
From the definition of the Newton-Mercator Series: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \ln {1 + x} | r = x - \dfrac {x^2} 2 + \dfrac {x^3} 3 - \dfrac {x^4} 4 + \cdots | c = }} {{eqn | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac {\paren {-1}^{n + 1} } n x^n | c = }} {{end-eqn}} This is valid for $-1 < x \le 1$....
The [[Definition:Newton-Mercator Series|Newton-Mercator Series]] for $x = 1$ converges to the [[Definition:Natural Logarithm|natural logarithm]] of $2$: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac {\paren {-1}^\paren {n - 1} } n | r = 1 - \frac 1 2 + \frac 1 3 - \frac 1 4 + \dotsb | c = }}...
From the definition of the [[Definition:Newton-Mercator Series|Newton-Mercator Series]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map \ln {1 + x} | r = x - \dfrac {x^2} 2 + \dfrac {x^3} 3 - \dfrac {x^4} 4 + \cdots | c = }} {{eqn | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 1}^\infty \frac {\paren {-1}^{n + 1} } n x^n | c = }} {{end-...
Newton-Mercator Series/Examples/2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Newton-Mercator_Series/Examples/2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Newton-Mercator_Series/Examples/2
[ "Examples of Power Series", "Logarithms", "Reciprocals", "Newton-Mercator Series" ]
[ "Definition:Newton-Mercator Series", "Definition:Natural Logarithm", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Mercator's Constant" ]
[ "Definition:Newton-Mercator Series", "Alternating Harmonic Series is Conditionally Convergent" ]
proofwiki-8464
Power Series Expansion for Sine Function
The sine function has the power series expansion: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sin x | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \paren {-1}^n \frac {x^{2 n + 1} } {\paren {2 n + 1}!} | c = }} {{eqn | r = x - \frac {x^3} {3!} + \frac {x^5} {5!} - \frac {x^7} {7!} + \cdots | c = }} {{end-eqn}} valid for all $x \...
From Derivative of Sine Function: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \sin x = \cos x$ From Derivative of Cosine Function: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \cos x = -\sin x$ Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^2} {\d x^2} \sin x | r = -\sin x | c = }} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^3} {\d x^3} \sin x | r = -\cos x | c = }} ...
The [[Definition:Sine Function|sine function]] has the [[Definition:Power Series|power series expansion]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \sin x | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \paren {-1}^n \frac {x^{2 n + 1} } {\paren {2 n + 1}!} | c = }} {{eqn | r = x - \frac {x^3} {3!} + \frac {x^5} {5!} - \frac {x^7} {7...
From [[Derivative of Sine Function]]: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \sin x = \cos x$ From [[Derivative of Cosine Function]]: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \cos x = -\sin x$ Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^2} {\d x^2} \sin x | r = -\sin x | c = }} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^3} {\d x^3} \sin x | r = -\cos x ...
Power Series Expansion for Sine Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Expansion_for_Sine_Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Expansion_for_Sine_Function
[ "Sine Function", "Examples of Power Series", "Taylor Series" ]
[ "Definition:Sine", "Definition:Power Series" ]
[ "Derivative of Sine Function", "Derivative of Cosine Function", "Definition:Maclaurin Series", "Sine of Zero is Zero", "Cosine of Zero is One", "Series of Power over Factorial Converges", "Definition:Convergent Series" ]
proofwiki-8465
Power Series Expansion for Cosine Function
The cosine function has the power series expansion: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \cos x | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \paren {-1}^n \frac {x^{2 n} } {\paren {2 n}!} | c = }} {{eqn | r = 1 - \frac {x^2} {2!} + \frac {x^4} {4!} - \frac {x^6} {6!} + \cdots | c = }} {{end-eqn}} valid for all $x \in \R$...
From Derivative of Cosine Function: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \cos x = -\sin x$ From Derivative of Sine Function: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \sin x = \cos x$ Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^2} {\d x^2} \cos x | r = -\cos x | c = }} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^3} {\d x^3} \cos x | r = \sin x | c = }} {...
The [[Definition:Cosine Function|cosine function]] has the [[Definition:Power Series|power series expansion]]: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \cos x | r = \sum_{n \mathop = 0}^\infty \paren {-1}^n \frac {x^{2 n} } {\paren {2 n}!} | c = }} {{eqn | r = 1 - \frac {x^2} {2!} + \frac {x^4} {4!} - \frac {x^6} {6!} +...
From [[Derivative of Cosine Function]]: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \cos x = -\sin x$ From [[Derivative of Sine Function]]: :$\dfrac \d {\d x} \sin x = \cos x$ Hence: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^2} {\d x^2} \cos x | r = -\cos x | c = }} {{eqn | l = \dfrac {\d^3} {\d x^3} \cos x | r = \sin x ...
Power Series Expansion for Cosine Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Expansion_for_Cosine_Function
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Power_Series_Expansion_for_Cosine_Function
[ "Cosine Function", "Examples of Power Series", "Taylor Series" ]
[ "Definition:Cosine", "Definition:Power Series" ]
[ "Derivative of Cosine Function", "Derivative of Sine Function", "Definition:Maclaurin Series", "Sine of Zero is Zero", "Cosine of Zero is One", "Series of Power over Factorial Converges", "Definition:Convergent Series" ]
proofwiki-8466
Spacing Limit Theorem
Let $X_{\paren i}$ be the $i$th ordered statistic of $N$ samples from a continuous random distribution with density function $\map {f_X} x$. Then the spacing between the ordered statistics given $X_{\paren i}$ converges in distribution to exponential for sufficiently large sampling according to: :$N \paren {X_{\paren {...
Given $i$ and $N$, the ordered statistic $X_{\paren i}$ has the probability density function: :$\map {f_{X_{\paren i} } } {x \mid i, N} = \dfrac {N!} {\paren {i - 1}! \paren {N - i}!} \map {F_X} x^{i - 1} \paren {1 - \map {F_X} x}^{N - i} \map {f_X} x$ where $\map {F_X} x$ is the cumulative distribution function of $X$...
Let $X_{\paren i}$ be the $i$th [[Definition:Ordered Statistic|ordered statistic]] of $N$ samples from a [[Definition:Continuous Random Variable|continuous random]] distribution with [[Definition:Probability Density Function|density function]] $\map {f_X} x$. Then the spacing between the ordered statistics [[Definitio...
[[Definition:Conditional Probability|Given]] $i$ and $N$, the ordered statistic $X_{\paren i}$ has the probability density function: :$\map {f_{X_{\paren i} } } {x \mid i, N} = \dfrac {N!} {\paren {i - 1}! \paren {N - i}!} \map {F_X} x^{i - 1} \paren {1 - \map {F_X} x}^{N - i} \map {f_X} x$ where $\map {F_X} x$ is the...
Spacing Limit Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Spacing_Limit_Theorem
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Spacing_Limit_Theorem
[ "Probability Theory", "Named Theorems" ]
[ "Definition:Ordered Statistic", "Definition:Random Variable/Continuous", "Definition:Probability Density Function", "Definition:Conditional Probability", "Definition:Convergence", "Definition:Exponential Distribution" ]
[ "Definition:Conditional Probability", "Definition:Cumulative Distribution Function", "Definition:Conditional Probability", "Definition:Conditional Probability", "Taylor's Theorem", "Definition:Exponential Function/Real/Limit of Sequence", "Category:Probability Theory", "Category:Named Theorems" ]
proofwiki-8467
Rational Number Space is Topological Space
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space formed by the rational numbers $\Q$ under the usual (Euclidean) topology $\tau_d$. Then $\tau_d$ forms a topology.
From Rational Numbers form Metric Space we have that $\Q$ is a metric space under the Euclidean metric. From Metric Induces Topology, it follows that the Euclidean topology forms a topology on $\Q$. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] formed by the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] $\Q$ under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|usual (Euclidean) topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\tau_d$ forms a [[Definition:Topology|topology]].
From [[Rational Numbers form Metric Space]] we have that $\Q$ is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Metric on Real Number Line|Euclidean metric]]. From [[Metric Induces Topology]], it follows that the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] form...
Rational Number Space is Topological Space/Proof 1
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Topological_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Topological_Space/Proof_1
[ "Rational Number Space is Topological Space", "Rational Number Space" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Topology" ]
[ "Rational Numbers form Metric Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Definition:Euclidean Metric/Real Number Line", "Metric Induces Topology", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Topology" ]
proofwiki-8468
Rational Number Space is Topological Space
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space formed by the rational numbers $\Q$ under the usual (Euclidean) topology $\tau_d$. Then $\tau_d$ forms a topology.
Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the real number space $\R$ under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. By definition of rational numbers, $\Q \subseteq \R$. From Topological Subspace is Topological Space we have that $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a topological space. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] formed by the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]] $\Q$ under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|usual (Euclidean) topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\tau_d$ forms a [[Definition:Topology|topology]].
Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Real Number Line|real number space]] $\R$ under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. By definition of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]], $\Q \subseteq \R$. From [[Topological Subspace is Topological Space]] ...
Rational Number Space is Topological Space/Proof 2
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Topological_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Topological_Space/Proof_2
[ "Rational Number Space is Topological Space", "Rational Number Space" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number/Real Number Line", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Rational Number", "Topological Subspace is Topological Space", "Definition:Topological Space" ]
proofwiki-8469
Irrational Number Space is Topological Space
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the irrational number space formed by the irrational numbers $\R \setminus \Q$ under the usual (Euclidean) topology $\tau_d$. Then $\tau_d$ forms a topology.
Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the real number space $\R$ under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. By definition of irrational numbers, $\R \setminus \Q \subseteq \R$. From Topological Subspace is Topological Space we have that $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is a topology. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Irrational Number Space|irrational number space]] formed by the [[Definition:Irrational Number|irrational numbers]] $\R \setminus \Q$ under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|usual (Euclidean) topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\tau_d$ forms a [[...
Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Real Number Line|real number space]] $\R$ under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. By definition of [[Definition:Irrational Number|irrational numbers]], $\R \setminus \Q \subseteq \R$. From [[Topological Subspace is Top...
Irrational Number Space is Topological Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Topological_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Topological_Space
[ "Irrational Number Space" ]
[ "Definition:Irrational Number Space", "Definition:Irrational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number/Real Number Line", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Irrational Number", "Topological Subspace is Topological Space", "Definition:Topology" ]
proofwiki-8470
Union of Closures of Singleton Rationals is Rational Space
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the usual (Euclidean) topology $\tau_d$. Let $B_\alpha$ denote the singleton containing the rational number $\alpha$. Then the union of the closures in the set of real numbers $\R$ of all $B_\alpha$ is $\Q$: :$\ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \map \cl {B_...
Let $\alpha \in \Q$. By Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line, $B_\alpha = \set \alpha$ is closed in $\R$. From Closed Set Equals its Closure, it follows that: :$B_\alpha = \map \cl {B_\alpha}$ Hence the result. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|usual (Euclidean) topology]] $\tau_d$. Let $B_\alpha$ denote the [[Definition:Singleton|singleton]] containing the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $\...
Let $\alpha \in \Q$. By [[Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line]], $B_\alpha = \set \alpha$ is [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed]] in $\R$. From [[Closed Set Equals its Closure]], it follows that: :$B_\alpha = \map \cl {B_\alpha}$ Hence the result. {{qed}}
Union of Closures of Singleton Rationals is Rational Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Closures_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Rational_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Union_of_Closures_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Rational_Space
[ "Rational Number Space", "Singletons", "Examples of Set Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Closure (Topology)", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Real Number" ]
[ "Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Set is Closed iff Equals Topological Closure" ]
proofwiki-8471
Closure of Union of Singleton Rationals is Real Number Line
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the usual (Euclidean) topology $\tau_d$. Let $B_\alpha$ be the singleton containing the rational number $\alpha$. Then the closure in the set of real numbers $\R$ of the union of all $B_\alpha$ is $\R$ itself: :$\ds \map \cl {\bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} ...
By definition: :$B_\alpha = \set \alpha$ Thus: :$\ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha = \Q$ The result follows from Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|usual (Euclidean) topology]] $\tau_d$. Let $B_\alpha$ be the [[Definition:Singleton|singleton]] containing the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $\alph...
By definition: :$B_\alpha = \set \alpha$ Thus: :$\ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha = \Q$ The result follows from [[Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers]]. {{qed}}
Closure of Union of Singleton Rationals is Real Number Line
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Union_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Real_Number_Line
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Union_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Real_Number_Line
[ "Rational Number Space", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Singletons", "Examples of Set Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Closure (Topology)", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Set Union" ]
[ "Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers" ]
proofwiki-8472
Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers
Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the same topology. Then: :$\Q^- = \R$ where $\Q^-$ denotes the closure of $\Q$.
From Rationals are Everywhere Dense in Topological Space of Reals, $\Q$ is everywhere dense in $\R$. It follows by definition of everywhere dense that $\Q^- = \R$. {{qed}} Category:Rational Number Space Category:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology Category:Set Closures h1q0jst1ieie6aoa4ptu2s188m4f779
Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|same topology]]. T...
From [[Rationals are Everywhere Dense in Topological Space of Reals]], $\Q$ is [[Definition:Everywhere Dense|everywhere dense]] in $\R$. It follows by definition of [[Definition:Everywhere Dense|everywhere dense]] that $\Q^- = \R$. {{qed}} [[Category:Rational Number Space]] [[Category:Real Number Line with Euclidean ...
Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Rational_Numbers_is_Real_Numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Rational_Numbers_is_Real_Numbers
[ "Rational Number Space", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Set Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Closure (Topology)" ]
[ "Rational Numbers are Everywhere Dense in Set of Real Numbers/Topology", "Definition:Everywhere Dense", "Definition:Everywhere Dense", "Category:Rational Number Space", "Category:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Category:Set Closures" ]
proofwiki-8473
Exterior of Union of Singleton Rationals is Empty
Let $B_\alpha$ be the singleton containing the rational number $\alpha$. Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology $\tau_d$. Then the exterior in $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ of the union of all $B_\alpha$ is the empty set: :$\ds \paren {\bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha}^e...
By definition: :$B_\alpha = \set \alpha$ Thus: :$\ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha = \Q$ By definition, the exterior of $\Q$ is the complement of the closure of $\Q$ in $\R$. By Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers: :$\Q^- = \R$ By Relative Complement with Self is Empty Set: :$\relcomp \R \R = \O$ Hen...
Let $B_\alpha$ be the [[Definition:Singleton|singleton]] containing the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $\alpha$. Let $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]] $\tau_d$. Then the [[Definition:Exterior (Top...
By definition: :$B_\alpha = \set \alpha$ Thus: :$\ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha = \Q$ By definition, the [[Definition:Exterior (Topology)|exterior]] of $\Q$ is the [[Definition:Set Complement|complement]] of the [[Definition:Closure (Topology)|closure]] of $\Q$ in $\R$. By [[Closure of Rational Numbers...
Exterior of Union of Singleton Rationals is Empty
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exterior_of_Union_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Empty
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Exterior_of_Union_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Empty
[ "Rational Number Space", "Singletons", "Examples of Set Exteriors" ]
[ "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Exterior (Topology)", "Definition:Set Union", "Definition:Empty Set" ]
[ "Definition:Exterior (Topology)", "Definition:Set Complement", "Definition:Closure (Topology)", "Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers", "Relative Complement with Self is Empty Set" ]
proofwiki-8474
Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line
Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ be the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Let $\alpha \in \R$ be a real number. Then $\set \alpha$ is closed in $\struct {\R, \tau}$.
From Open Sets in Real Number Line, the set: :$S := \openint \gets \alpha \cup \openint \alpha \to$ is open in $\R$. Thus by definition of closed, its complement relative to $\R$: :$\R \setminus S = \set \alpha$ is closed in $\R$. {{qed}} Category:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology Category:Closed Sets h6rshhni5f...
Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ be the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Let $\alpha \in \R$ be a [[Definition:Real Number|real number]]. Then $\set \alpha$ is [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed]] in $\struct {\R, \tau}$.
From [[Open Sets in Real Number Line]], the [[Definition:Set|set]]: :$S := \openint \gets \alpha \cup \openint \alpha \to$ is [[Definition:Open Set (Topology)|open]] in $\R$. Thus by definition of [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed]], its [[Definition:Relative Complement|complement relative to $\R$]]: :$\R \set...
Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Number_is_Closed_in_Real_Number_Line
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Real_Number_is_Closed_in_Real_Number_Line
[ "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Closed Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology" ]
[ "Open Sets in Real Number Line", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Open Set/Topology", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Definition:Relative Complement", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Category:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Category:Closed Sets" ]
proofwiki-8475
Intersection of Exteriors of Singleton Rationals is Irrationals
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the usual (Euclidean) topology $\tau_d$. Let $B_\alpha$ be the singleton containing the rational number $\alpha$. Then: :$\ds \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha^e = \R \setminus \Q$ where $B_\alpha^e$ denotes the exterior of $B_\alpha$ in $\R$.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha^e | r = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \R \setminus B_\alpha^- | c = {{Defof|Exterior (Topology)|index = 1|Exterior}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \R \setminus B_\alpha | c = Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line...
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|usual (Euclidean) topology]] $\tau_d$. Let $B_\alpha$ be the [[Definition:Singleton|singleton]] containing the [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]] $\alph...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} B_\alpha^e | r = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \R \setminus B_\alpha^- | c = {{Defof|Exterior (Topology)|index = 1|Exterior}} }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \R \setminus B_\alpha | c = [[Real Number is Closed in Real Number Li...
Intersection of Exteriors of Singleton Rationals is Irrationals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Exteriors_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Irrationals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Exteriors_of_Singleton_Rationals_is_Irrationals
[ "Rational Number Space", "Singletons", "Examples of Set Exteriors" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Exterior (Topology)" ]
[ "Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line", "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Difference/General Case/Difference with Union" ]
proofwiki-8476
Rational Numbers form F-Sigma Set in Reals
Let $\Q$ be the set of rational numbers. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ be the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Then $\Q$ is a $F_\sigma$ set in $\R$.
Let $\alpha \in \Q$ be a rational number. From Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line, $\set \alpha$ is a closed set of $\R$. From Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite, $\ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \set \alpha$ is a countable union. Thus $\Q = \ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \set \alpha$ is a countabl...
Let $\Q$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ be the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Then $\Q$ is a [[Definition:F-Sigma Set|$F_\sigma$ set]] in $\R$.
Let $\alpha \in \Q$ be a [[Definition:Rational Number|rational number]]. From [[Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line]], $\set \alpha$ is a [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed set]] of $\R$. From [[Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite]], $\ds \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \set \alpha$ is a [[Definition...
Rational Numbers form F-Sigma Set in Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Numbers_form_F-Sigma_Set_in_Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Numbers_form_F-Sigma_Set_in_Reals
[ "Rational Numbers", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Examples of F-Sigma Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:F-Sigma Set" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number", "Real Number is Closed in Real Number Line", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite", "Definition:Set Union/Countable Union", "Definition:Set Union/Countable Union", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Definition:F-Sigma Set" ]
proofwiki-8477
Set of Rational Numbers is not Closed in Reals
Let $\Q$ be the set of rational numbers. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Then $\Q$ is not closed in $\R$.
Let $\alpha \in \R \setminus \Q$. Let $I := \openint a b$ be an open interval in $\R$ such that $\alpha \in I$. By Between two Real Numbers exists Rational Number: :$\exists \beta \in \Q: \beta \in I$. Thus $I$ contains elements of $\Q$ and so $\R \setminus \Q$ is not open in $\R$. Thus by definition, $\Q$ is not close...
Let $\Q$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Then $\Q$ is not [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed]] in $\R$.
Let $\alpha \in \R \setminus \Q$. Let $I := \openint a b$ be an [[Definition:Open Real Interval|open interval]] in $\R$ such that $\alpha \in I$. By [[Between two Real Numbers exists Rational Number]]: :$\exists \beta \in \Q: \beta \in I$. Thus $I$ contains elements of $\Q$ and so $\R \setminus \Q$ is not [[Definiti...
Set of Rational Numbers is not Closed in Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rational_Numbers_is_not_Closed_in_Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rational_Numbers_is_not_Closed_in_Reals
[ "Rational Numbers", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology" ]
[ "Definition:Real Interval/Open", "Between two Real Numbers exists Rational Number", "Definition:Open Set/Topology", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology" ]
proofwiki-8478
Set of Rational Numbers is not G-Delta Set in Reals
Let $\Q$ be the set of rational numbers. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Then $\Q$ is not a $G_\delta$ set in $\R$.
{{AimForCont}} $\Q$ is a $G_\delta$ set in $\R$. Let $\Q = \ds \bigcap_{i \mathop \in \N} V_i$. Since Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite, there exists an enumeration of $\Q$. Write $\Q = \set {q_i}_{i \mathop \in \N}$. Define $U_i = V_i \setminus \set {q_i}$. We show that $U_i$ is dense in $\R$. :Let $A \subseteq ...
Let $\Q$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Then $\Q$ is not a [[Definition:G-Delta Set|$G_\delta$ set]] in $\R$.
{{AimForCont}} $\Q$ is a [[Definition:G-Delta Set|$G_\delta$ set]] in $\R$. Let $\Q = \ds \bigcap_{i \mathop \in \N} V_i$. Since [[Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite]], there exists an [[Definition:Enumeration|enumeration]] of $\Q$. Write $\Q = \set {q_i}_{i \mathop \in \N}$. Define $U_i = V_i \setminus \set {...
Set of Rational Numbers is not G-Delta Set in Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rational_Numbers_is_not_G-Delta_Set_in_Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Set_of_Rational_Numbers_is_not_G-Delta_Set_in_Reals
[ "Rational Numbers", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Examples of G-Delta Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:G-Delta Set" ]
[ "Definition:G-Delta Set", "Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite", "Definition:Enumeration", "Definition:Everywhere Dense", "Definition:Open Set/Topology", "Basis for Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line", "Definition:Real Interval/Open", "Between two Real Numbers exists Rational Number", "Betwe...
proofwiki-8479
Irrational Numbers form G-Delta Set in Reals
Let $\R \setminus \Q$ denote the set of irrational numbers. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Then $\R \setminus \Q$ forms a $G_\delta$ set in $\R$.
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \Q | r = \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \set \alpha | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \R \setminus \Q | r = \R \setminus \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \set \alpha | c = }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \paren {\R \setminus \set \alpha} |...
Let $\R \setminus \Q$ denote the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Irrational Number|irrational numbers]]. Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Then $\R \setminus \Q$ forms a [[Definition:G-Delta Set|$G_...
{{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \Q | r = \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \set \alpha | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \R \setminus \Q | r = \R \setminus \bigcup_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \set \alpha | c = }} {{eqn | r = \bigcap_{\alpha \mathop \in \Q} \paren {\R \setminus \set \alpha} |...
Irrational Numbers form G-Delta Set in Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Numbers_form_G-Delta_Set_in_Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Numbers_form_G-Delta_Set_in_Reals
[ "Irrational Numbers", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Examples of G-Delta Sets" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Irrational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:G-Delta Set" ]
[ "De Morgan's Laws (Set Theory)/Set Difference/General Case/Difference with Union", "Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite" ]
proofwiki-8480
Eigenvalue of Matrix Power
Let $A$ be a square matrix. Let $\lambda$ be an eigenvalue of $A$ and $\mathbf v$ be the corresponding eigenvector. Then: :$A^n \mathbf v = \lambda^n \mathbf v$ holds for each positive integer $n$. Here $A^n$ is the $n$th power of $A$.
Proof by induction: For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the proposition: :$A^n \mathbf v = \lambda^n \mathbf v$
Let $A$ be a [[Definition:Square Matrix|square matrix]]. Let $\lambda$ be an [[Definition:Eigenvalue of Square Matrix|eigenvalue]] of $A$ and $\mathbf v$ be the corresponding [[Definition:Eigenvector of Square Matrix|eigenvector]]. Then: :$A^n \mathbf v = \lambda^n \mathbf v$ holds for each [[Definition:Positive In...
Proof by [[Principle of Mathematical Induction|induction]]: For all $n \in \N_{> 0}$, let $\map P n$ be the [[Definition:Proposition|proposition]]: :$A^n \mathbf v = \lambda^n \mathbf v$
Eigenvalue of Matrix Power
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Eigenvalue_of_Matrix_Power
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Eigenvalue_of_Matrix_Power
[ "Matrix Algebra", "Eigenvalues", "Proofs by Induction" ]
[ "Definition:Matrix/Square Matrix", "Definition:Eigenvalue/Square Matrix", "Definition:Eigenvector/Square Matrix", "Definition:Positive/Integer", "Definition:Power of Matrix" ]
[ "Principle of Mathematical Induction", "Definition:Proposition", "Principle of Mathematical Induction" ]
proofwiki-8481
Closure of Intersection of Rationals and Irrationals is Empty Set
Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Let $\Q$ be the set of rational numbers. Then: :$\paren {\Q \cap \paren {\R \setminus \Q} }^- = \O$ where: :$\R \setminus \Q$ denotes the set of irrational numbers :$\paren {\Q \cap \paren {\R \setminus \Q} }^-$ denotes the closur...
From Set Difference Intersection with Second Set is Empty Set: :$\Q \cap \paren {\R \setminus \Q} = \O$ By Empty Set is Closed in Topological Space, $\O$ is closed in $\R$. From Closed Set Equals its Closure: :$\O^- = \O$ Hence the result. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ denote the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Let $\Q$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Then: :$\paren {\Q \cap \paren {\R \setminus \Q} }^- = \O$ where: :$\R \setminus...
From [[Set Difference Intersection with Second Set is Empty Set]]: :$\Q \cap \paren {\R \setminus \Q} = \O$ By [[Empty Set is Closed in Topological Space]], $\O$ is [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed]] in $\R$. From [[Closed Set Equals its Closure]]: :$\O^- = \O$ Hence the result. {{qed}}
Closure of Intersection of Rationals and Irrationals is Empty Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Intersection_of_Rationals_and_Irrationals_is_Empty_Set
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Closure_of_Intersection_of_Rationals_and_Irrationals_is_Empty_Set
[ "Rational Numbers", "Irrational Numbers", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Examples of Set Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Irrational Number", "Definition:Closure (Topology)" ]
[ "Set Difference Intersection with Second Set is Empty Set", "Empty Set is Closed/Topological Space", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Set is Closed iff Equals Topological Closure" ]
proofwiki-8482
Intersection of Closures of Rationals and Irrationals is Reals
Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ be the real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology. Let $\Q$ be the set of rational numbers. Then: :$\Q^- \cap \paren {\R \setminus \Q}^- = \R$ where: :$\R \setminus \Q$ denotes the set of irrational numbers :$\Q^-$ denotes the closure of $\Q$.
From Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers: :$\Q^- = \R$ From Closure of Irrational Numbers is Real Numbers: :$\paren {\R \setminus \Q}^- = \R$ The result follows from Set Intersection is Idempotent. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\R, \tau}$ be the [[Definition:Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology|real number line with the usual (Euclidean) topology]]. Let $\Q$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Then: :$\Q^- \cap \paren {\R \setminus \Q}^- = \R$ where: :$\R \setminus \Q$ denotes...
From [[Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers]]: :$\Q^- = \R$ From [[Closure of Irrational Numbers is Real Numbers]]: :$\paren {\R \setminus \Q}^- = \R$ The result follows from [[Set Intersection is Idempotent]]. {{qed}}
Intersection of Closures of Rationals and Irrationals is Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Closures_of_Rationals_and_Irrationals_is_Reals
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Intersection_of_Closures_of_Rationals_and_Irrationals_is_Reals
[ "Rational Numbers", "Irrational Numbers", "Real Number Line with Euclidean Topology", "Examples of Set Closures" ]
[ "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Set", "Definition:Irrational Number", "Definition:Closure (Topology)" ]
[ "Closure of Rational Numbers is Real Numbers", "Closure of Irrational Numbers is Real Numbers", "Set Intersection is Idempotent" ]
proofwiki-8483
Irrational Numbers form Metric Space
Let $\mathbb I = \R \setminus \Q$ be the set of all irrational numbers. Let $d: \mathbb I \times \mathbb I \to \R$ be defined as: :$\map d {x_1, x_2} = \size {x_1 - x_2}$ where $\size x$ is the absolute value of $x$. Then $d$ is a metric on $\mathbb I$ and so $\struct {\mathbb I, d}$ is a metric space.
From the definition of absolute value: :$\size {x_1 - x_2} = \sqrt {\paren {x_1 - x_2}^2}$ This is the Euclidean metric. in Euclidean Metric on Real Vector Space is Metric this is shown to be a metric. {{qed}}
Let $\mathbb I = \R \setminus \Q$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] of all [[Definition:Irrational Number|irrational numbers]]. Let $d: \mathbb I \times \mathbb I \to \R$ be defined as: :$\map d {x_1, x_2} = \size {x_1 - x_2}$ where $\size x$ is the [[Definition:Absolute Value|absolute value]] of $x$. Then $d$ is a [[...
From the definition of [[Definition:Absolute Value|absolute value]]: :$\size {x_1 - x_2} = \sqrt {\paren {x_1 - x_2}^2}$ This is the [[Definition:Euclidean Metric on Real Number Line|Euclidean metric]]. in [[Euclidean Metric on Real Vector Space is Metric]] this is shown to be a [[Definition:Metric|metric]]. {{qed}}
Irrational Numbers form Metric Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Numbers_form_Metric_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Numbers_form_Metric_Space
[ "Irrational Number Space", "Irrational Numbers", "Examples of Euclidean Spaces", "Examples of Metric Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Definition:Irrational Number", "Definition:Absolute Value", "Definition:Metric Space/Metric", "Definition:Metric Space" ]
[ "Definition:Absolute Value", "Definition:Euclidean Metric/Real Number Line", "Euclidean Metric on Real Vector Space is Metric", "Definition:Metric Space/Metric" ]
proofwiki-8484
Rational Number Space is Completely Normal
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a completely normal space.
From Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space, a Euclidean space is a metric space. From Metric Space is Completely Normal it follows that $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a completely normal space. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Completely Normal Space|completely normal space]].
From [[Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space]], a [[Definition:Euclidean Space|Euclidean space]] is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]]. From [[Metric Space is Completely Normal]] it follows that $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Completely Normal Space|completely normal space]]. {{qed}}
Rational Number Space is Completely Normal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Completely_Normal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Completely_Normal
[ "Rational Number Space", "Examples of Completely Normal Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Completely Normal Space" ]
[ "Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Metric Space is Completely Normal", "Definition:Completely Normal Space" ]
proofwiki-8485
Irrational Number Space is Completely Normal
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the irrational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is a completely normal space.
From Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space, a Euclidean space is a metric space. Hence in particular $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ is a metric space. From Subspace of Metric Space is Metric Space, it follows that $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is likewise a metric space. From Metric Space is Completely Normal it follo...
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Irrational Number Space|irrational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Completely Normal Space|completely normal space]].
From [[Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space]], a [[Definition:Euclidean Space|Euclidean space]] is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]]. Hence in particular $\struct {\R, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]]. From [[Subspace of Metric Space is Metric Space]], it follows that $\struct {\R \...
Irrational Number Space is Completely Normal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Completely_Normal
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Completely_Normal
[ "Irrational Number Space", "Examples of Completely Normal Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Irrational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Completely Normal Space" ]
[ "Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Subspace of Metric Space is Metric Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Metric Space is Completely Normal", "Definition:Completely Normal Space" ]
proofwiki-8486
Rational Number Space is Paracompact
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is paracompact.
From Rational Numbers form Metric Space, $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a metric space. The result follows from Metric Space is Paracompact. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Paracompact Space|paracompact]].
From [[Rational Numbers form Metric Space]], $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]]. The result follows from [[Metric Space is Paracompact]]. {{qed}}
Rational Number Space is Paracompact
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Paracompact
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Paracompact
[ "Rational Number Space", "Examples of Paracompact Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Paracompact Space" ]
[ "Rational Numbers form Metric Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Metric Space is Paracompact" ]
proofwiki-8487
Irrational Number Space is Paracompact
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the irrational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is paracompact.
From Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space, a Euclidean space is a metric space. The result follows from Metric Space is Paracompact. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Irrational Number Space|irrational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Paracompact Space|paracompact]].
From [[Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space]], a [[Definition:Euclidean Space|Euclidean space]] is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]]. The result follows from [[Metric Space is Paracompact]]. {{qed}}
Irrational Number Space is Paracompact
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Paracompact
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Paracompact
[ "Irrational Number Space", "Examples of Paracompact Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Irrational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Paracompact Space" ]
[ "Euclidean Space is Complete Metric Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Metric Space is Paracompact" ]
proofwiki-8488
Euclidean Plus Metric is Metric
Let $\R$ be the set of real numbers. Let $d: \R \times \R \to \R$ be the Euclidean plus metric: :$\map d {x, y} := \size {x - y} + \ds \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {x - r_j}} - \max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {y - r_j} } } }$ Then $d$ is indeed a me...
Recall that $\set {r_j}_{j \mathop \in \N}$ is an enumeration of the rational numbers $\Q$. Also, we note that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {x - r_j} } - \max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {x - r_j} } } } |...
Let $\R$ be the [[Definition:Real Number|set of real numbers]]. Let $d: \R \times \R \to \R$ be the [[Definition:Euclidean Plus Metric|Euclidean plus metric]]: :$\map d {x, y} := \size {x - y} + \ds \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {x - r_j}} - \max_{j \math...
Recall that $\set {r_j}_{j \mathop \in \N}$ is an [[Definition:Countably Infinite Enumeration|enumeration]] of the [[Definition:Rational Numbers|rational numbers]] $\Q$. Also, we note that: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | o = | r = \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {...
Euclidean Plus Metric is Metric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Euclidean_Plus_Metric_is_Metric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Euclidean_Plus_Metric_is_Metric
[ "Euclidean Plus Metric" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Euclidean Plus Metric", "Definition:Metric Space/Metric" ]
[ "Definition:Enumeration/Countably Infinite", "Definition:Rational Number", "Sum of Infinite Geometric Sequence/Corollary 1", "Definition:Convergent Series/Number Field", "Axiom:Metric Space Axioms", "Definition:Metric Space/Metric" ]
proofwiki-8489
Open Ball in Euclidean Plus Metric is Subset of Equivalent Ball in Euclidean Metric
Let $\R$ be the set of real numbers. Let $d: \R \times \R \to \R$ be the Euclidean plus metric: :$\map d {x, y} := \size {x - y} + \ds \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {x - r_j} } - \max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {y - r_j} } } }$ Let $d': \R \times \R ...
Let $p \in \R$. Let $\epsilon \in \R_{>0}$. Let $x \in \map {B_\epsilon} {p; d}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map d {x, p} | o = < | r = \epsilon | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \epsilon | o = > | r = \size {x - y} + \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\...
Let $\R$ be the [[Definition:Real Number|set of real numbers]]. Let $d: \R \times \R \to \R$ be the [[Definition:Euclidean Plus Metric|Euclidean plus metric]]: :$\map d {x, y} := \size {x - y} + \ds \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {x - r_j} } - \max_{j \mat...
Let $p \in \R$. Let $\epsilon \in \R_{>0}$. Let $x \in \map {B_\epsilon} {p; d}$. Then: {{begin-eqn}} {{eqn | l = \map d {x, p} | o = < | r = \epsilon | c = }} {{eqn | ll= \leadsto | l = \epsilon | o = > | r = \size {x - y} + \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \si...
Open Ball in Euclidean Plus Metric is Subset of Equivalent Ball in Euclidean Metric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Open_Ball_in_Euclidean_Plus_Metric_is_Subset_of_Equivalent_Ball_in_Euclidean_Metric
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Open_Ball_in_Euclidean_Plus_Metric_is_Subset_of_Equivalent_Ball_in_Euclidean_Metric
[ "Euclidean Plus Metric", "Examples of Open Balls" ]
[ "Definition:Real Number", "Definition:Euclidean Plus Metric", "Definition:Euclidean Metric/Real Number Plane", "Definition:Strictly Positive/Real Number", "Definition:Open Ball", "Definition:Open Ball" ]
[]
proofwiki-8490
Irrational Number Space is Completely Metrizable
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the irrational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is completely metrizable.
Let $\set {r_i}$ be an enumeration of rational numbers. Let $d: \R \times \R \to \R$ be the Euclidean plus metric: :$\ds \map d {x, y} := \size {x - y} + \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \size {\max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {x - r_j} } - \max_{j \mathop \le i} \frac 1 {\size {y - r_j} } } }$ Let...
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Irrational Number Space|irrational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Completely Metrizable Space|completely metrizable]].
Let $\set {r_i}$ be an [[Definition:Countably Infinite Enumeration|enumeration]] of [[Definition:Rational Number|rational numbers]]. Let $d: \R \times \R \to \R$ be the [[Definition:Euclidean Plus Metric|Euclidean plus metric]]: :$\ds \map d {x, y} := \size {x - y} + \sum_{i \mathop = 1}^\infty 2^{-i} \map \inf {1, \s...
Irrational Number Space is Completely Metrizable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Completely_Metrizable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Completely_Metrizable
[ "Irrational Number Space", "Examples of Complete Metric Spaces", "Examples of Completely Metrizable Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Irrational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Completely Metrizable Space" ]
[ "Definition:Enumeration/Countably Infinite", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Euclidean Plus Metric", "Definition:Convergent Sequence/Real Numbers", "Definition:Rational Number", "Definition:Cauchy Sequence/Real Numbers", "Definition:Cauchy Sequence/Real Numbers", "Definition:Convergent Seque...
proofwiki-8491
Irrational Number Space is Non-Meager
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the irrational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is non-meager.
From Irrational Number Space is Completely Metrizable, $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, d}$ is a complete metric space. From the Baire Category Theorem, a complete metric space is also a Baire space. The result follows from Baire Space is Non-Meager. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Irrational Number Space|irrational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Non-Meager Space|non-meager]].
From [[Irrational Number Space is Completely Metrizable]], $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, d}$ is a [[Definition:Complete Metric Space|complete metric space]]. From the [[Baire Category Theorem]], a [[Definition:Complete Metric Space|complete metric space]] is also a [[Definition:Baire Space (Topology)|Baire space]]. The ...
Irrational Number Space is Non-Meager
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Non-Meager
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Non-Meager
[ "Irrational Number Space", "Examples of Non-Meager Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Irrational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Meager Space/Non-Meager" ]
[ "Irrational Number Space is Completely Metrizable", "Definition:Complete Metric Space", "Baire Category Theorem", "Definition:Complete Metric Space", "Definition:Baire Space (Topology)", "Baire Space is Non-Meager" ]
proofwiki-8492
Rational Number Space is Meager
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is meager.
From Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite, $\Q$ is a countable union of singleton subsets. From Singleton Set is Nowhere Dense in Rational Space, each of those singleton subsets is nowhere dense in $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$. The result follows from definition of meager. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Meager Space|meager]].
From [[Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite]], $\Q$ is a [[Definition:Countable Union|countable union]] of [[Definition:Singleton|singleton]] [[Definition:Subset|subsets]]. From [[Singleton Set is Nowhere Dense in Rational Space]], each of those [[Definition:Singleton|singleton]] [[Definition:Subset|subsets]] is [[...
Rational Number Space is Meager
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Meager
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Meager
[ "Rational Number Space", "Examples of Meager Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Meager Space" ]
[ "Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite", "Definition:Set Union/Countable Union", "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Subset", "Singleton Set is Nowhere Dense in Rational Space", "Definition:Singleton", "Definition:Subset", "Definition:Nowhere Dense", "Definition:Meager Space" ]
proofwiki-8493
Rational Number Space is Separable
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is separable.
From Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite, $\Q$ is itself countable. The result follows by Countable Space is Separable. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Separable Space|separable]].
From [[Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite]], $\Q$ is itself [[Definition:Countable Set|countable]]. The result follows by [[Countable Space is Separable]]. {{qed}}
Rational Number Space is Separable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Separable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Separable
[ "Rational Number Space", "Examples of Separable Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Separable Space" ]
[ "Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite", "Definition:Countable Set", "Countable Space is Separable" ]
proofwiki-8494
Underlying Set of Topological Space is Everywhere Dense
Let $T = \struct {S, \tau}$ be a topological space. Then the underlying set $S$ of $T$ is everywhere dense in $T$.
From Underlying Set of Topological Space is Closed, $S$ is closed in $T$. From Closed Set Equals its Closure, $S = S^-$. The result follows from definition of everywhere dense. {{qed}} Category:Denseness 9a0db4iczcdfb57dc5v1qkct58ghh81
Let $T = \struct {S, \tau}$ be a [[Definition:Topological Space|topological space]]. Then the [[Definition:Underlying Set of Topological Space|underlying set]] $S$ of $T$ is [[Definition:Everywhere Dense|everywhere dense]] in $T$.
From [[Underlying Set of Topological Space is Closed]], $S$ is [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed]] in $T$. From [[Closed Set Equals its Closure]], $S = S^-$. The result follows from definition of [[Definition:Everywhere Dense|everywhere dense]]. {{qed}} [[Category:Denseness]] 9a0db4iczcdfb57dc5v1qkct58ghh81
Underlying Set of Topological Space is Everywhere Dense
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Underlying_Set_of_Topological_Space_is_Everywhere_Dense
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Underlying_Set_of_Topological_Space_is_Everywhere_Dense
[ "Denseness" ]
[ "Definition:Topological Space", "Definition:Underlying Set/Topological Space", "Definition:Everywhere Dense" ]
[ "Underlying Set of Topological Space is Closed", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Set is Closed iff Equals Topological Closure", "Definition:Everywhere Dense", "Category:Denseness" ]
proofwiki-8495
Irrational Number Space is Separable
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the irrational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is separable.
Let $S$ be the set defined as: :$S = \set {\pi + q: q \in \Q}$ From Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite, $\Q$ is countable. Therefore $S$ is also countable. From $\pi$ is Irrational: :$\pi \in \R \setminus \Q$ It follows from Rational Addition is Closed that: :$\forall q \in \Q: \pi + q \in \R \setminus \Q$ and so:...
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Irrational Number Space|irrational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Separable Space|separable]].
Let $S$ be the [[Definition:Set|set]] defined as: :$S = \set {\pi + q: q \in \Q}$ From [[Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite]], $\Q$ is [[Definition:Countable Set|countable]]. Therefore $S$ is also [[Definition:Countable Set|countable]]. From [[Pi is Irrational|$\pi$ is Irrational]]: :$\pi \in \R \setminus \Q$ ...
Irrational Number Space is Separable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Separable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Separable
[ "Irrational Number Space", "Examples of Separable Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Irrational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Separable Space" ]
[ "Definition:Set", "Rational Numbers are Countably Infinite", "Definition:Countable Set", "Definition:Countable Set", "Pi is Irrational", "Rational Addition is Closed", "Rationals plus Irrational are Everywhere Dense in Irrationals", "Definition:Everywhere Dense", "Definition:Countable Set", "Defin...
proofwiki-8496
Rational Number Space is Second-Countable
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is second-countable.
From Rational Numbers form Metric Space, $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a metric space. From Rational Number Space is Separable, $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a separable space. The result follows from Separable Metric Space is Second-Countable. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Second-Countable Space|second-countable]].
From [[Rational Numbers form Metric Space]], $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]]. From [[Rational Number Space is Separable]], $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Separable Space|separable space]]. The result follows from [[Separable Metric Space is Second-Countable]]. {{qed}}
Rational Number Space is Second-Countable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Second-Countable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_Second-Countable
[ "Rational Number Space", "Examples of Second-Countable Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Second-Countable Space" ]
[ "Rational Numbers form Metric Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Rational Number Space is Separable", "Definition:Separable Space", "Separable Metric Space is Second-Countable" ]
proofwiki-8497
Irrational Number Space is Second-Countable
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the irrational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is second-countable.
From Irrational Numbers form Metric Space, $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is a metric space. From Irrational Number Space is Separable, $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is a separable space. The result follows from Separable Metric Space is Second-Countable. {{qed}}
Let $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Irrational Number Space|irrational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is [[Definition:Second-Countable Space|second-countable]].
From [[Irrational Numbers form Metric Space]], $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Metric Space|metric space]]. From [[Irrational Number Space is Separable]], $\struct {\R \setminus \Q, \tau_d}$ is a [[Definition:Separable Space|separable space]]. The result follows from [[Separable Metric Space is ...
Irrational Number Space is Second-Countable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Second-Countable
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Irrational_Number_Space_is_Second-Countable
[ "Irrational Number Space", "Examples of Second-Countable Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Irrational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Second-Countable Space" ]
[ "Irrational Numbers form Metric Space", "Definition:Metric Space", "Irrational Number Space is Separable", "Definition:Separable Space", "Separable Metric Space is Second-Countable" ]
proofwiki-8498
Compact Set of Rational Numbers is Nowhere Dense
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Let $S \subseteq \Q$ be a compact set of $\Q$. Then $S$ is nowhere dense in $\Q$.
By Compact Subspace of Hausdorff Space is Closed, $S$ is closed in $\Q$. By Set is Closed iff Equals Topological Closure, $S = S^-$. {{AimForCont}} $S$ is not nowhere dense in $\Q$. Then $S^-$ contains some non-empty open set. From Basis for Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line, the set of all open real intervals of ...
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Let $S \subseteq \Q$ be a [[Definition:Compact Topological Subspace|compact set]] of $\Q$. Then $S$ is [[Definition:Nowhere Dense|n...
By [[Compact Subspace of Hausdorff Space is Closed]], $S$ is [[Definition:Closed Set (Topology)|closed]] in $\Q$. By [[Set is Closed iff Equals Topological Closure]], $S = S^-$. {{AimForCont}} $S$ is not [[Definition:Nowhere Dense|nowhere dense]] in $\Q$. Then $S^-$ contains some [[Definition:Non-Empty Set|non-empt...
Compact Set of Rational Numbers is Nowhere Dense
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Compact_Set_of_Rational_Numbers_is_Nowhere_Dense
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Compact_Set_of_Rational_Numbers_is_Nowhere_Dense
[ "Rational Number Space", "Compact Topological Spaces", "Examples of Nowhere Dense" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Compact Topological Space/Subspace", "Definition:Nowhere Dense" ]
[ "Compact Subspace of Hausdorff Space is Closed", "Definition:Closed Set/Topology", "Set is Closed iff Equals Topological Closure", "Definition:Nowhere Dense", "Definition:Non-Empty Set", "Definition:Open Set/Topology", "Basis for Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line", "Definition:Real Interval/Open"...
proofwiki-8499
Rational Number Space is not Locally Compact Hausdorff Space
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the rational number space under the Euclidean topology $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is not a locally compact Hausdorff Space.
For $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ to be a locally compact Hausdorff Space, it is required that every point of $\Q$ has a compact neighborhood. Let $x \in \Q$. Let $N \subseteq \Q$ be a neighborhood of $x$. Then: :$\exists U \in \tau: x \in U \subseteq N \subseteq \Q$. {{AimForCont}} $N$ is compact. By Compact Set of Rational ...
Let $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ be the [[Definition:Rational Number Space|rational number space]] under the [[Definition:Euclidean Topology on Real Number Line|Euclidean topology]] $\tau_d$. Then $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ is not a [[Definition:Locally Compact Hausdorff Space|locally compact Hausdorff Space]].
For $\struct {\Q, \tau_d}$ to be a [[Definition:Locally Compact Hausdorff Space|locally compact Hausdorff Space]], it is required that every [[Definition:Point of Set|point]] of $\Q$ has a [[Definition:Compact Topological Subspace|compact]] [[Definition:Neighborhood of Point|neighborhood]]. Let $x \in \Q$. Let $N \s...
Rational Number Space is not Locally Compact Hausdorff Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_not_Locally_Compact_Hausdorff_Space
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Number_Space_is_not_Locally_Compact_Hausdorff_Space
[ "Rational Number Space", "Examples of Locally Compact Hausdorff Spaces" ]
[ "Definition:Rational Number Space", "Definition:Euclidean Space/Euclidean Topology/Real Number Line", "Definition:Locally Compact Hausdorff Space" ]
[ "Definition:Locally Compact Hausdorff Space", "Definition:Element", "Definition:Compact Topological Space/Subspace", "Definition:Neighborhood (Topology)/Point", "Definition:Neighborhood (Topology)/Point", "Definition:Compact Topological Space/Subspace", "Compact Set of Rational Numbers is Nowhere Dense"...