If and
prove or disprove the following:
.
.
.
.
.
.
- True Proof. To show
we must show that every element in
is also in
. Further (since Apostol seems to distinguish between
and
) we want to show that
.
First, since
is the only element of
, and
, we see that every element of
is indeed contained in
. Hence,
.
Then, since
, but
, we see that
. Hence
, so
is a proper subset of
, or
. ∎
- True
Proof. This follows immediately from part (a) since. ∎
- Not True
This is not true sinceand the set
is not an element of
(since
).
- True
Proof. There is really nothing to prove here. By definition,is the set containing 1, so 1 is in
. ∎
- Not true
This is not true since 1 is not a set, so is not a subset of.
- Not true
Again, 1 is not a set, so cannot be a subset of.
Why does (b) true when A does’nt equal B ? Isin’nt that the distinction of ? I thought that either one or the other could’ve be true .