Why does the set {1,3,5,7… ; 2,4,6,8…} qualify as well-ordered? How to explain this notation?
$begingroup$
The set {odd natural numbers greater than 0 }U {even natural numbers}
that is, the set
Union { {1,3,5,7...}, {2,4,6,8...} }
also strangely written
{1,3,5,7... ; 2,4,6,8...} .
is often given as example of a well ordered set ( a set such that for all subset there is a first element).
I have some problems with this example.
(1) First, which relation orders this set? could this relation be defined explicitely? is this relation somewhat analogous to lexigraphic order? So I don't understand how this set can be an ordered set.
(2) Second, I don't understand how it is well-ordered. In order to be well ordered, every subset should have a first element. But apparently the set {7,2} is a subset of my set. What is the first element of {7,2}?
elementary-number-theory elementary-set-theory order-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set {odd natural numbers greater than 0 }U {even natural numbers}
that is, the set
Union { {1,3,5,7...}, {2,4,6,8...} }
also strangely written
{1,3,5,7... ; 2,4,6,8...} .
is often given as example of a well ordered set ( a set such that for all subset there is a first element).
I have some problems with this example.
(1) First, which relation orders this set? could this relation be defined explicitely? is this relation somewhat analogous to lexigraphic order? So I don't understand how this set can be an ordered set.
(2) Second, I don't understand how it is well-ordered. In order to be well ordered, every subset should have a first element. But apparently the set {7,2} is a subset of my set. What is the first element of {7,2}?
elementary-number-theory elementary-set-theory order-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set {odd natural numbers greater than 0 }U {even natural numbers}
that is, the set
Union { {1,3,5,7...}, {2,4,6,8...} }
also strangely written
{1,3,5,7... ; 2,4,6,8...} .
is often given as example of a well ordered set ( a set such that for all subset there is a first element).
I have some problems with this example.
(1) First, which relation orders this set? could this relation be defined explicitely? is this relation somewhat analogous to lexigraphic order? So I don't understand how this set can be an ordered set.
(2) Second, I don't understand how it is well-ordered. In order to be well ordered, every subset should have a first element. But apparently the set {7,2} is a subset of my set. What is the first element of {7,2}?
elementary-number-theory elementary-set-theory order-theory
$endgroup$
The set {odd natural numbers greater than 0 }U {even natural numbers}
that is, the set
Union { {1,3,5,7...}, {2,4,6,8...} }
also strangely written
{1,3,5,7... ; 2,4,6,8...} .
is often given as example of a well ordered set ( a set such that for all subset there is a first element).
I have some problems with this example.
(1) First, which relation orders this set? could this relation be defined explicitely? is this relation somewhat analogous to lexigraphic order? So I don't understand how this set can be an ordered set.
(2) Second, I don't understand how it is well-ordered. In order to be well ordered, every subset should have a first element. But apparently the set {7,2} is a subset of my set. What is the first element of {7,2}?
elementary-number-theory elementary-set-theory order-theory
elementary-number-theory elementary-set-theory order-theory
edited 1 hour ago
Ray LittleRock
asked 1 hour ago
Ray LittleRockRay LittleRock
12110
12110
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
As suggested, a well-ordered set is one in which each subset has a first element. The natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ with their usual relation $le$ form a prototypical example:
$$0 < 1 < 2 < 3 < 4 < 5 < cdots$$
however what I believe your example, written as
$${ 1, 3, 5, 7, cdots ; 2, 4, 6, 8, cdots }$$
is supposed to indicate (what book or other reference is this from?) is a well-ordered set in which the order looks like this:
$$1 < 3 < 5 < 7 < cdots < 2 < 4 < 6 < 8 < cdots$$
in other words, it's all the odd numbers ordered in the usual way, and then after ALL of them, all the even numbers, again, ordered in the usual way. The trick is that every odd number is "less" than every even number in this new ordering, and thus shows a well-order which is different from the usual ordering of the natural numbers. It's meant to show that there are more forms a well-order can take than one might at first expect. In particular, it is a well-order which has an "internal infinity" in that there are an infinite number of elements between any odd number and any even number.
With regard to the question of the initial element of the subset ${7, 2}$, the answer is simple: looking at the sequence as shown above and where 7 and 2 fall therein, it is seen at a glance to be 7 (not 2). In terms of the mathematical definition, since 7 is odd, and 2 is even, 2 must be "greater" than every odd number, hence also greater than 7 and 7 is the initial element.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sets have no "inherent order". They can have a natural order (such as $Bbb N$ or $Bbb R$ having a natural ordering that we consider somehow "part of the set"), but they do not have an inherent ordering.
Writing ${1,3,5,dots;0,2,4,dots}$ is a terrible abuse of notation.
But it is indeed a well-ordering of $Bbb N$ which is not its natural ordering (which is also a well-ordering). Here is an explicit definition:
$$mprec niff begin{cases}mtext{ is odd and }ntext{ is even}, &text{ or}\mequiv npmod 2text{ and }m<n.end{cases}$$
To see it is a well-ordering, note that each of the subsets, evens and odds, is ordered in the natural way which makes that part a well-order, and so given a non-empty set, it either has a smallest odd number or it is a subset of the even numbers.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. Thanks a lot! So in the context of my question, putting first odd numbers and second even ones, the first element of { 7,2} is 7, am I right?
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
52 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes. I misremembered between reading the question and writing my answer (mainly because whenever I gave that example, I would put the even numbers first. I'll edit to fix this.)
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. The set ( with its abusive notation) is given in my book as the union of {odds} and {even} to show, as example, that the union of a family of WOS is also a WOS. Does it really qualify as such a union? As noted JoséCarlosSantos in a previous answer, normally the union of these two sets is simply N with its natural ordering.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
49 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I don't know who wrote the book. There is a notion of summation of orders, and the sum of well-orders over a well-ordered index, is again a well-order. My guess is that this was their meaning.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia.The reference is Schaum's Outline of Set Theory.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
45 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set that you described is simply $mathbb N$, the set of all natural numbers. The order relation that we use here is the usual one. And the first element of ${7,2}$ is $2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks. Could you also explain the following notation for this set ( a notation I have encountered) : {1,3,5... ; 2,4,6...}
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
No, I cannot; I have never seen this notation.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks for your help.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I let the question live its life for some hours, and after that, I promise I will mark an answer as accepted.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3208098%2fwhy-does-the-set-1-3-5-7-2-4-6-8-qualify-as-well-ordered-how-to-expla%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
As suggested, a well-ordered set is one in which each subset has a first element. The natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ with their usual relation $le$ form a prototypical example:
$$0 < 1 < 2 < 3 < 4 < 5 < cdots$$
however what I believe your example, written as
$${ 1, 3, 5, 7, cdots ; 2, 4, 6, 8, cdots }$$
is supposed to indicate (what book or other reference is this from?) is a well-ordered set in which the order looks like this:
$$1 < 3 < 5 < 7 < cdots < 2 < 4 < 6 < 8 < cdots$$
in other words, it's all the odd numbers ordered in the usual way, and then after ALL of them, all the even numbers, again, ordered in the usual way. The trick is that every odd number is "less" than every even number in this new ordering, and thus shows a well-order which is different from the usual ordering of the natural numbers. It's meant to show that there are more forms a well-order can take than one might at first expect. In particular, it is a well-order which has an "internal infinity" in that there are an infinite number of elements between any odd number and any even number.
With regard to the question of the initial element of the subset ${7, 2}$, the answer is simple: looking at the sequence as shown above and where 7 and 2 fall therein, it is seen at a glance to be 7 (not 2). In terms of the mathematical definition, since 7 is odd, and 2 is even, 2 must be "greater" than every odd number, hence also greater than 7 and 7 is the initial element.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As suggested, a well-ordered set is one in which each subset has a first element. The natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ with their usual relation $le$ form a prototypical example:
$$0 < 1 < 2 < 3 < 4 < 5 < cdots$$
however what I believe your example, written as
$${ 1, 3, 5, 7, cdots ; 2, 4, 6, 8, cdots }$$
is supposed to indicate (what book or other reference is this from?) is a well-ordered set in which the order looks like this:
$$1 < 3 < 5 < 7 < cdots < 2 < 4 < 6 < 8 < cdots$$
in other words, it's all the odd numbers ordered in the usual way, and then after ALL of them, all the even numbers, again, ordered in the usual way. The trick is that every odd number is "less" than every even number in this new ordering, and thus shows a well-order which is different from the usual ordering of the natural numbers. It's meant to show that there are more forms a well-order can take than one might at first expect. In particular, it is a well-order which has an "internal infinity" in that there are an infinite number of elements between any odd number and any even number.
With regard to the question of the initial element of the subset ${7, 2}$, the answer is simple: looking at the sequence as shown above and where 7 and 2 fall therein, it is seen at a glance to be 7 (not 2). In terms of the mathematical definition, since 7 is odd, and 2 is even, 2 must be "greater" than every odd number, hence also greater than 7 and 7 is the initial element.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As suggested, a well-ordered set is one in which each subset has a first element. The natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ with their usual relation $le$ form a prototypical example:
$$0 < 1 < 2 < 3 < 4 < 5 < cdots$$
however what I believe your example, written as
$${ 1, 3, 5, 7, cdots ; 2, 4, 6, 8, cdots }$$
is supposed to indicate (what book or other reference is this from?) is a well-ordered set in which the order looks like this:
$$1 < 3 < 5 < 7 < cdots < 2 < 4 < 6 < 8 < cdots$$
in other words, it's all the odd numbers ordered in the usual way, and then after ALL of them, all the even numbers, again, ordered in the usual way. The trick is that every odd number is "less" than every even number in this new ordering, and thus shows a well-order which is different from the usual ordering of the natural numbers. It's meant to show that there are more forms a well-order can take than one might at first expect. In particular, it is a well-order which has an "internal infinity" in that there are an infinite number of elements between any odd number and any even number.
With regard to the question of the initial element of the subset ${7, 2}$, the answer is simple: looking at the sequence as shown above and where 7 and 2 fall therein, it is seen at a glance to be 7 (not 2). In terms of the mathematical definition, since 7 is odd, and 2 is even, 2 must be "greater" than every odd number, hence also greater than 7 and 7 is the initial element.
$endgroup$
As suggested, a well-ordered set is one in which each subset has a first element. The natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ with their usual relation $le$ form a prototypical example:
$$0 < 1 < 2 < 3 < 4 < 5 < cdots$$
however what I believe your example, written as
$${ 1, 3, 5, 7, cdots ; 2, 4, 6, 8, cdots }$$
is supposed to indicate (what book or other reference is this from?) is a well-ordered set in which the order looks like this:
$$1 < 3 < 5 < 7 < cdots < 2 < 4 < 6 < 8 < cdots$$
in other words, it's all the odd numbers ordered in the usual way, and then after ALL of them, all the even numbers, again, ordered in the usual way. The trick is that every odd number is "less" than every even number in this new ordering, and thus shows a well-order which is different from the usual ordering of the natural numbers. It's meant to show that there are more forms a well-order can take than one might at first expect. In particular, it is a well-order which has an "internal infinity" in that there are an infinite number of elements between any odd number and any even number.
With regard to the question of the initial element of the subset ${7, 2}$, the answer is simple: looking at the sequence as shown above and where 7 and 2 fall therein, it is seen at a glance to be 7 (not 2). In terms of the mathematical definition, since 7 is odd, and 2 is even, 2 must be "greater" than every odd number, hence also greater than 7 and 7 is the initial element.
edited 53 mins ago
answered 58 mins ago
The_SympathizerThe_Sympathizer
8,0152246
8,0152246
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sets have no "inherent order". They can have a natural order (such as $Bbb N$ or $Bbb R$ having a natural ordering that we consider somehow "part of the set"), but they do not have an inherent ordering.
Writing ${1,3,5,dots;0,2,4,dots}$ is a terrible abuse of notation.
But it is indeed a well-ordering of $Bbb N$ which is not its natural ordering (which is also a well-ordering). Here is an explicit definition:
$$mprec niff begin{cases}mtext{ is odd and }ntext{ is even}, &text{ or}\mequiv npmod 2text{ and }m<n.end{cases}$$
To see it is a well-ordering, note that each of the subsets, evens and odds, is ordered in the natural way which makes that part a well-order, and so given a non-empty set, it either has a smallest odd number or it is a subset of the even numbers.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. Thanks a lot! So in the context of my question, putting first odd numbers and second even ones, the first element of { 7,2} is 7, am I right?
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
52 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes. I misremembered between reading the question and writing my answer (mainly because whenever I gave that example, I would put the even numbers first. I'll edit to fix this.)
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. The set ( with its abusive notation) is given in my book as the union of {odds} and {even} to show, as example, that the union of a family of WOS is also a WOS. Does it really qualify as such a union? As noted JoséCarlosSantos in a previous answer, normally the union of these two sets is simply N with its natural ordering.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
49 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I don't know who wrote the book. There is a notion of summation of orders, and the sum of well-orders over a well-ordered index, is again a well-order. My guess is that this was their meaning.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia.The reference is Schaum's Outline of Set Theory.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
45 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sets have no "inherent order". They can have a natural order (such as $Bbb N$ or $Bbb R$ having a natural ordering that we consider somehow "part of the set"), but they do not have an inherent ordering.
Writing ${1,3,5,dots;0,2,4,dots}$ is a terrible abuse of notation.
But it is indeed a well-ordering of $Bbb N$ which is not its natural ordering (which is also a well-ordering). Here is an explicit definition:
$$mprec niff begin{cases}mtext{ is odd and }ntext{ is even}, &text{ or}\mequiv npmod 2text{ and }m<n.end{cases}$$
To see it is a well-ordering, note that each of the subsets, evens and odds, is ordered in the natural way which makes that part a well-order, and so given a non-empty set, it either has a smallest odd number or it is a subset of the even numbers.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. Thanks a lot! So in the context of my question, putting first odd numbers and second even ones, the first element of { 7,2} is 7, am I right?
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
52 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes. I misremembered between reading the question and writing my answer (mainly because whenever I gave that example, I would put the even numbers first. I'll edit to fix this.)
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. The set ( with its abusive notation) is given in my book as the union of {odds} and {even} to show, as example, that the union of a family of WOS is also a WOS. Does it really qualify as such a union? As noted JoséCarlosSantos in a previous answer, normally the union of these two sets is simply N with its natural ordering.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
49 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I don't know who wrote the book. There is a notion of summation of orders, and the sum of well-orders over a well-ordered index, is again a well-order. My guess is that this was their meaning.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia.The reference is Schaum's Outline of Set Theory.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
45 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sets have no "inherent order". They can have a natural order (such as $Bbb N$ or $Bbb R$ having a natural ordering that we consider somehow "part of the set"), but they do not have an inherent ordering.
Writing ${1,3,5,dots;0,2,4,dots}$ is a terrible abuse of notation.
But it is indeed a well-ordering of $Bbb N$ which is not its natural ordering (which is also a well-ordering). Here is an explicit definition:
$$mprec niff begin{cases}mtext{ is odd and }ntext{ is even}, &text{ or}\mequiv npmod 2text{ and }m<n.end{cases}$$
To see it is a well-ordering, note that each of the subsets, evens and odds, is ordered in the natural way which makes that part a well-order, and so given a non-empty set, it either has a smallest odd number or it is a subset of the even numbers.
$endgroup$
Sets have no "inherent order". They can have a natural order (such as $Bbb N$ or $Bbb R$ having a natural ordering that we consider somehow "part of the set"), but they do not have an inherent ordering.
Writing ${1,3,5,dots;0,2,4,dots}$ is a terrible abuse of notation.
But it is indeed a well-ordering of $Bbb N$ which is not its natural ordering (which is also a well-ordering). Here is an explicit definition:
$$mprec niff begin{cases}mtext{ is odd and }ntext{ is even}, &text{ or}\mequiv npmod 2text{ and }m<n.end{cases}$$
To see it is a well-ordering, note that each of the subsets, evens and odds, is ordered in the natural way which makes that part a well-order, and so given a non-empty set, it either has a smallest odd number or it is a subset of the even numbers.
edited 50 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
Asaf Karagila♦Asaf Karagila
309k33442776
309k33442776
1
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. Thanks a lot! So in the context of my question, putting first odd numbers and second even ones, the first element of { 7,2} is 7, am I right?
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
52 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes. I misremembered between reading the question and writing my answer (mainly because whenever I gave that example, I would put the even numbers first. I'll edit to fix this.)
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. The set ( with its abusive notation) is given in my book as the union of {odds} and {even} to show, as example, that the union of a family of WOS is also a WOS. Does it really qualify as such a union? As noted JoséCarlosSantos in a previous answer, normally the union of these two sets is simply N with its natural ordering.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
49 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I don't know who wrote the book. There is a notion of summation of orders, and the sum of well-orders over a well-ordered index, is again a well-order. My guess is that this was their meaning.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia.The reference is Schaum's Outline of Set Theory.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
45 mins ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. Thanks a lot! So in the context of my question, putting first odd numbers and second even ones, the first element of { 7,2} is 7, am I right?
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
52 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
Yes. I misremembered between reading the question and writing my answer (mainly because whenever I gave that example, I would put the even numbers first. I'll edit to fix this.)
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. The set ( with its abusive notation) is given in my book as the union of {odds} and {even} to show, as example, that the union of a family of WOS is also a WOS. Does it really qualify as such a union? As noted JoséCarlosSantos in a previous answer, normally the union of these two sets is simply N with its natural ordering.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
49 mins ago
1
$begingroup$
I don't know who wrote the book. There is a notion of summation of orders, and the sum of well-orders over a well-ordered index, is again a well-order. My guess is that this was their meaning.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia.The reference is Schaum's Outline of Set Theory.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
45 mins ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. Thanks a lot! So in the context of my question, putting first odd numbers and second even ones, the first element of { 7,2} is 7, am I right?
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. Thanks a lot! So in the context of my question, putting first odd numbers and second even ones, the first element of { 7,2} is 7, am I right?
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
52 mins ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Yes. I misremembered between reading the question and writing my answer (mainly because whenever I gave that example, I would put the even numbers first. I'll edit to fix this.)
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
Yes. I misremembered between reading the question and writing my answer (mainly because whenever I gave that example, I would put the even numbers first. I'll edit to fix this.)
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
52 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. The set ( with its abusive notation) is given in my book as the union of {odds} and {even} to show, as example, that the union of a family of WOS is also a WOS. Does it really qualify as such a union? As noted JoséCarlosSantos in a previous answer, normally the union of these two sets is simply N with its natural ordering.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia. The set ( with its abusive notation) is given in my book as the union of {odds} and {even} to show, as example, that the union of a family of WOS is also a WOS. Does it really qualify as such a union? As noted JoséCarlosSantos in a previous answer, normally the union of these two sets is simply N with its natural ordering.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
49 mins ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I don't know who wrote the book. There is a notion of summation of orders, and the sum of well-orders over a well-ordered index, is again a well-order. My guess is that this was their meaning.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
I don't know who wrote the book. There is a notion of summation of orders, and the sum of well-orders over a well-ordered index, is again a well-order. My guess is that this was their meaning.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila♦
48 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia.The reference is Schaum's Outline of Set Theory.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
45 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AsafKalaglia.The reference is Schaum's Outline of Set Theory.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
45 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set that you described is simply $mathbb N$, the set of all natural numbers. The order relation that we use here is the usual one. And the first element of ${7,2}$ is $2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks. Could you also explain the following notation for this set ( a notation I have encountered) : {1,3,5... ; 2,4,6...}
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
No, I cannot; I have never seen this notation.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks for your help.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I let the question live its life for some hours, and after that, I promise I will mark an answer as accepted.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set that you described is simply $mathbb N$, the set of all natural numbers. The order relation that we use here is the usual one. And the first element of ${7,2}$ is $2$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks. Could you also explain the following notation for this set ( a notation I have encountered) : {1,3,5... ; 2,4,6...}
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
No, I cannot; I have never seen this notation.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks for your help.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I let the question live its life for some hours, and after that, I promise I will mark an answer as accepted.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The set that you described is simply $mathbb N$, the set of all natural numbers. The order relation that we use here is the usual one. And the first element of ${7,2}$ is $2$.
$endgroup$
The set that you described is simply $mathbb N$, the set of all natural numbers. The order relation that we use here is the usual one. And the first element of ${7,2}$ is $2$.
answered 1 hour ago
José Carlos SantosJosé Carlos Santos
179k24139254
179k24139254
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks. Could you also explain the following notation for this set ( a notation I have encountered) : {1,3,5... ; 2,4,6...}
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
No, I cannot; I have never seen this notation.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks for your help.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I let the question live its life for some hours, and after that, I promise I will mark an answer as accepted.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks. Could you also explain the following notation for this set ( a notation I have encountered) : {1,3,5... ; 2,4,6...}
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
No, I cannot; I have never seen this notation.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks for your help.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I let the question live its life for some hours, and after that, I promise I will mark an answer as accepted.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks. Could you also explain the following notation for this set ( a notation I have encountered) : {1,3,5... ; 2,4,6...}
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks. Could you also explain the following notation for this set ( a notation I have encountered) : {1,3,5... ; 2,4,6...}
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
2
2
$begingroup$
No, I cannot; I have never seen this notation.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
No, I cannot; I have never seen this notation.
$endgroup$
– José Carlos Santos
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks for your help.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@JoséCarlosSantos.Thanks for your help.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I let the question live its life for some hours, and after that, I promise I will mark an answer as accepted.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I let the question live its life for some hours, and after that, I promise I will mark an answer as accepted.
$endgroup$
– Ray LittleRock
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3208098%2fwhy-does-the-set-1-3-5-7-2-4-6-8-qualify-as-well-ordered-how-to-expla%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown