Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Let R be the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. (This set is sometimes called "the Russell set".) If R is not a member of itself, then its definition entails that it is a member of itself; yet, if it is a member of itself, then it is not a member of itself, since it is the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. The ...
After all this, the version of the "set of all sets" paradox conceived by Bertrand Russell in 1903 led to a serious crisis in set theory. Russell recognized that the statement x = x is true for every set, and thus the set of all sets is defined by {x | x = x}. In 1906 he constructed several paradox sets, the most famous of which is the set of ...
Russell's paradox concerns the impossibility of a set of sets, whose members are all sets that do not contain themselves. If such a set could exist, it could neither contain itself (because its members all do not contain themselves) nor avoid containing itself (because if it did, it should be included as one of its members). [2]
Symmetric difference of sets A and B, denoted A B or A ⊖ B, is the set of all objects that are a member of exactly one of A and B (elements which are in one of the sets, but not in both). For instance, for the sets {1, 2, 3} and {2, 3, 4} , the symmetric difference set is {1, 4} .
The above concept of relation [a] has been generalized to admit relations between members of two different sets (heterogeneous relation, like "lies on" between the set of all points and that of all lines in geometry), relations between three or more sets (finitary relation, like "person x lives in town y at time z "), and relations between ...
To investigate the left distributivity of set subtraction over unions or intersections, consider how the sets involved in (both of) De Morgan's laws are all related: () = = () always holds (the equalities on the left and right are De Morgan's laws) but equality is not guaranteed in general (that is, the containment might be strict).
Within set theory, many collections of sets turn out to be proper classes. Examples include the class of all sets (the universal class), the class of all ordinal numbers, and the class of all cardinal numbers. One way to prove that a class is proper is to place it in bijection with the class of all ordinal numbers
In mathematics, a set A is a subset of a set B if all elements of A are also elements of B; B is then a superset of A. It is possible for A and B to be equal; if they are unequal, then A is a proper subset of B. The relationship of one set being a subset of another is called inclusion (or sometimes containment).