Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
3.5.1.1 Empty set. 3.5.2 Meets, ... 8.3.2 Conditions guaranteeing that images distribute over set operations. ... 9.3 Sequences of sets. 9.3.1 Partitions. 10 See also ...
As an example, "is less than" is a relation on the set of natural numbers; it holds, for instance, between the values 1 and 3 (denoted as 1 < 3), and likewise between 3 and 4 (denoted as 3 < 4), but not between the values 3 and 1 nor between 4 and 4, that is, 3 < 1 and 4 < 4 both evaluate to false.
If M is a set or class whose elements are sets, then x is an element of the union of M if and only if there is at least one element A of M such that x is an element of A. [11] In symbols: x ∈ ⋃ M ∃ A ∈ M , x ∈ A . {\displaystyle x\in \bigcup \mathbf {M} \iff \exists A\in \mathbf {M} ,\ x\in A.}
The New International Version (NIV) is a translation of the Bible into contemporary English. Published by Biblica, the complete NIV was released on October 27, 1978 [6] with a minor revision in 1984 and a major revision in 2011. The NIV relies on recently-published critical editions of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. [1] [2]
Set-builder notation can be used to describe a set that is defined by a predicate, that is, a logical formula that evaluates to true for an element of the set, and false otherwise. [2]
Just as arithmetic features binary operations on numbers, set theory features binary operations on sets. [9] The following is a partial list of them: Union of the sets A and B, denoted A ∪ B, is the set of all objects that are a member of A, or B, or both. [10] For example, the union of {1, 2, 3} and {2, 3, 4} is the set {1, 2, 3, 4}.
The collection of convex subsets of a vector space, an affine space, or a Euclidean space has the following properties: [9] [10] The empty set and the whole space are convex. The intersection of any collection of convex sets is convex. The union of a sequence of convex sets is convex, if they form a non-decreasing chain for inclusion.
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]