Is it possible to multiply a set by a natural number? [closed]
$begingroup$
Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
New contributor
$endgroup$
closed as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister Jan 8 at 19:57
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
New contributor
$endgroup$
closed as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister Jan 8 at 19:57
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
12
$begingroup$
Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
$endgroup$
– clathratus
Jan 8 at 5:26
13
$begingroup$
You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 8 at 5:37
5
$begingroup$
I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
$endgroup$
– freakish
Jan 8 at 7:45
22
$begingroup$
@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
$endgroup$
– F.Carette
Jan 8 at 8:46
1
$begingroup$
Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
$endgroup$
– DRF
Jan 8 at 14:26
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
New contributor
$endgroup$
Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory
New contributor
New contributor
edited Jan 8 at 5:26
clathratus
3,536332
3,536332
New contributor
asked Jan 8 at 5:01
Hunter KimuraHunter Kimura
502
502
New contributor
New contributor
closed as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister Jan 8 at 19:57
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
closed as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister Jan 8 at 19:57
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
12
$begingroup$
Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
$endgroup$
– clathratus
Jan 8 at 5:26
13
$begingroup$
You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 8 at 5:37
5
$begingroup$
I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
$endgroup$
– freakish
Jan 8 at 7:45
22
$begingroup$
@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
$endgroup$
– F.Carette
Jan 8 at 8:46
1
$begingroup$
Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
$endgroup$
– DRF
Jan 8 at 14:26
|
show 5 more comments
12
$begingroup$
Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
$endgroup$
– clathratus
Jan 8 at 5:26
13
$begingroup$
You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 8 at 5:37
5
$begingroup$
I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
$endgroup$
– freakish
Jan 8 at 7:45
22
$begingroup$
@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
$endgroup$
– F.Carette
Jan 8 at 8:46
1
$begingroup$
Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
$endgroup$
– DRF
Jan 8 at 14:26
12
12
$begingroup$
Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
$endgroup$
– clathratus
Jan 8 at 5:26
$begingroup$
Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
$endgroup$
– clathratus
Jan 8 at 5:26
13
13
$begingroup$
You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 8 at 5:37
$begingroup$
You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 8 at 5:37
5
5
$begingroup$
I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
$endgroup$
– freakish
Jan 8 at 7:45
$begingroup$
I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
$endgroup$
– freakish
Jan 8 at 7:45
22
22
$begingroup$
@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
$endgroup$
– F.Carette
Jan 8 at 8:46
$begingroup$
@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
$endgroup$
– F.Carette
Jan 8 at 8:46
1
1
$begingroup$
Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
$endgroup$
– DRF
Jan 8 at 14:26
$begingroup$
Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
$endgroup$
– DRF
Jan 8 at 14:26
|
show 5 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:
Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
$$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$
Your idea is a specific instance:
Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
$$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$
The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.
Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:
If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.
Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."
Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.
$endgroup$
Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.
answered Jan 8 at 5:04
John DoeJohn Doe
11.1k11238
11.1k11238
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.
$endgroup$
Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.
answered Jan 8 at 5:03
ershersh
275112
275112
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:
Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
$$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$
Your idea is a specific instance:
Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
$$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$
The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.
Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:
If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.
Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."
Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:
Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
$$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$
Your idea is a specific instance:
Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
$$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$
The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.
Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:
If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.
Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."
Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:
Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
$$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$
Your idea is a specific instance:
Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
$$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$
The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.
Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:
If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.
Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."
Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)
$endgroup$
In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:
Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
$$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$
Your idea is a specific instance:
Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
$$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$
The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.
Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:
If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.
Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."
Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)
answered Jan 8 at 10:03
ComFreekComFreek
5321411
5321411
add a comment |
add a comment |
12
$begingroup$
Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
$endgroup$
– clathratus
Jan 8 at 5:26
13
$begingroup$
You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
$endgroup$
– fleablood
Jan 8 at 5:37
5
$begingroup$
I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
$endgroup$
– freakish
Jan 8 at 7:45
22
$begingroup$
@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
$endgroup$
– F.Carette
Jan 8 at 8:46
1
$begingroup$
Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
$endgroup$
– DRF
Jan 8 at 14:26