This article is about sets in mathematics.
See also
In mathematics, a set is a collection of objects such that two sets are equal if, and only if, they contain the same objects. A finite set is a collection of a finite number of objects; the alternative is an infinite set.
For a discussion of the properties and axioms concerning the construction of sets, see naive set theory and axiomatic set theory.
Here we give only a brief overview of the concept.
Sets are one of the basic concepts of mathematics.
A set is, more or less, just a collection of objects, called its elements. Standard notation uses braces around the list of elements, as in:
- {red, green, blue}
- {red, red, blue, red, green, red, red, green, red, red, blue}
- {x : x is an additive primary color}
All three lines above denote the same set.
As you see, it is possible to describe one and the same set in different ways: either by listing all its elements (best for small finite sets) or by giving a defining property of all its elements; and it does not matter in what order, or how many times, the elements are listed, if a list is given.
Set Terminology
If <math>A</math> and <math>B</math> are sets and every <math>x</math> in <math>A</math> is also contained in <math>B</math>, then <math>A</math> is said to be a subset of <math>B</math>, denoted <math>A \subseteq B</math>. If atleast one element in <math>B</math> is not also in <math>A</math>, <math>A</math> is called a proper subset of <math>B</math>, denoted <math>A \subset B</math>. Every set has as subsets itself, called the improper subset, and the empty set {} or <math>\emptyset</math>. The fact that an element <math>x</math> belongs to the set <math>A</math> is denoted <math>x \in A</math>.
The union of a collection of sets <math>S = {S_1, S_2, S_3, \cdots}</math> is the set of all elements contained in at least one of the sets <math>S_1, S_2, S_3, \cdots</math>
The intersection of a collection of sets <math>T = {T_1, T_2, T_3, \cdots}</math> is the set of all elements contained in all of the sets.
These unions and intersections are denoted
- <math>S_1 \cup S_2 \cup S_3 \cup \cdots</math>
and
- <math>T_1 \cap T_2 \cap T_3 \cap \cdots</math>
respectively.
The "number of elements" in a certain set is called the cardinal number of the set and denoted <math>|A|</math> for a set <math>A</math> (for a finite set this is an ordinary number, for an infinite set it differentiates between different "degrees of infiniteness", named <math>\aleph_0</math> (aleph zero), <math>\aleph_1, \aleph_2 ...</math>).
The set of all subsets of <math>X</math> is called its power set and is denoted <math>2^X</math> or <math>P(X)</math>.
This power set is a Boolean algebra under the operations of union and intersection.
The set of functions from a set A to a set B is sometimes denoted by BA. It is a generalisation of the power set in which 2 could be regarded as the set {0,1} (see natural number).
The cartesian product of two sets A and B is the set
- A×B={(a,b) : a ∈ A and b ∈ B}.
The sum of two sets A and B is the set
- A+B = A×{0} ∪ B×{1}.
Examples of Sets of Numbers
- Natural numbers which are used for counting the members of sets.
- Integers which appear as solutions to equations like x + a = b.
- Rational numbers which appear as solutions to equations like a + bx = c.
- Algebraic numbers which can appear as solutions to polynomial equations (with integer coefficients) and may involve radicals and certain other irrational numbers.
- Real numbers which include transcendental numbers (which can't appear as solutions to polynomial equations with rational coefficents) as well as the algebraic numbers.
- Complex numbers which provide solutions to equations such as x2 + 1 = 0.
Special Remarks About Terminology
Care must be taken with verbal descriptions of sets. One can describe in words a set whose existence is paradoxical. If one assumes such a set exists, an apparent paradox or antinomy may occur. Axiomatic set theory was created to avoid these problems.
For example, suppose we call a set "well-behaved" if it doesn't contain itself as an element.
Now consider the set S of all well-behaved sets.
Is S itself well-behaved?
There is no consistent answer; this is Russell's paradox.
In axiomatic set theory, the set S is not allowed, and we have no paradox.
All Wikipedia text
is available under the
terms of the GNU Free Documentation License