The Timpson Lyceum seal

The Timpson Lyceum · Geometry (2024)

Set Theory and Proofs – Lecture 3 (Geometry)

Overview

This lecture introduces set theory as the foundation on which geometry will be built, layering on top of the propositional and predicate logic developed earlier. Rather than an axiomatic construction, the goal is intuition: what a set is, how to write one, the relations between sets (membership, subset, equality), the common named number sets, set-builder notation, and the core set operations. The lecture closes with worked proofs drawn from an algebra review, showing how to argue rigorously from a tiny set of assumptions about the integers. Together these give you the vocabulary and the proof habits the rest of the course presupposes.

Key Concepts

Sets vs. lists

Membership (∈\in) — the first set relation (a two-term predicate returning true/false).

Subset (⊆\subseteq) — defined using only membership: A⊆B  ⟺  ( ∀x: x∈A  ⟹  x∈B )A \subseteq B \iff \big(\,\forall x:\ x \in A \implies x \in B\,\big) Every element of AA must also lie in BB. Note {1,2,3}⊆{1,2,3}\{1,2,3\} \subseteq \{1,2,3\} (a set is a subset of itself), and {{1}}⊈{1,3}\{\{1\}\} \not\subseteq \{1,3\} because {1}\{1\} is not an element of {1,3}\{1,3\}.

Set equality (==) — equality is extended beyond logic's "identical symbols" rule: A=B  ⟺  (A⊆B and B⊆A)A = B \iff (A \subseteq B \ \text{and}\ B \subseteq A) i.e. each set contains exactly the elements of the other. This is precisely why order and duplicates do not matter.

Proper subset (⊂\subset / ⊊\subsetneq) — analogous to << versus ≤\le: A⊊B  ⟺  (A⊆B and A≠B)A \subsetneq B \iff (A \subseteq B \ \text{and}\ A \neq B) AA is contained in BB but is strictly smaller.

Common named sets

Set-builder notation — { x∣P(x) }\{\,x \mid P(x)\,\}, read "the set of all xx such that P(x)P(x)," where PP is a predicate.

Set operations (relations return true/false; operations take sets and return a set).

Properties of operations

Proof setup (integer axioms). The proofs use two cancellation assumptions about integers, plus ordinary arithmetic and the two laws of identity (∀x: x=x\forall x:\ x=x; equals may be substituted for equals):

To prove an implication "if PP then QQ," assume the antecedent PP and derive QQ (a false antecedent is vacuously true). A biconditional "PP iff QQ" is proved in two directions: P  ⟹  QP \implies Q and Q  ⟹  PQ \implies P.

Worked Example

Claim. If 3x+4=193x + 4 = 19, then x=5x = 5. (Subtraction and division are not yet available — only A1, A2, and arithmetic.)

Assume 3x+4=193x + 4 = 19. Rewrite 19=15+419 = 15 + 4 and apply A1 to cancel the common +4+4; then rewrite 15=3⋅515 = 3\cdot 5 and apply A2 (since 3≠03 \neq 0) to cancel the common factor 33:

3x+4=193x+4=15+4(arithmetic)3x=15(A1, cancel +4)3⋅x=3⋅5(arithmetic)x=5(A2, cancel factor 3, 3≠0)■\begin{aligned} 3x + 4 &= 19 \\ 3x + 4 &= 15 + 4 &&\text{(arithmetic)} \\ 3x &= 15 &&\text{(A1, cancel } +4\text{)} \\ 3 \cdot x &= 3 \cdot 5 &&\text{(arithmetic)} \\ x &= 5 &&\text{(A2, cancel factor } 3,\ 3 \neq 0\text{)} \quad\blacksquare \end{aligned}

A subtler case. Given r(7b−5)=rr(7b - 5) = r with bb an integer, prove r=0r = 0. From r(7b−5)=r=r⋅1r(7b-5) = r = r\cdot 1, either r=0r = 0 or r≠0r \neq 0. If r≠0r \neq 0, A2 cancels rr to give 7b−5=17b - 5 = 1, i.e. 7b=67b = 6, forcing b=67∉Zb = \tfrac{6}{7} \notin \mathbb{Z} — impossible since bb is an integer. Hence the assumption r≠0r \neq 0 fails, so r=0r = 0 (and r=0r=0 indeed satisfies the equation). ■\blacksquare

Summary