How can I calculate \[A \cup B \cup C\]?
I just see this: \[(A\cup B)\cup C\]
\[ n( (A\cup B) \cup C)\]=?
I'm a little lost, Is it that correct?
\[=(n(A)+n(B) - n(A\cap B))\cup n(C)\]
I don't want to speak up on this because I've never studied this stuff in particular. I do want to see the answer though, so I'm posting.
Ok!
Mmm ok, let's see:
\[n((A\cup B)\cup C)=n(A\cup B)+n(C)-n((A\cup B)\cap C)\]
but \[(A\cup B)\cap C=A\cap B\cap C\]
A union B union C simply means to combine the three sets. The order in which you do it does not matter.
So: \[n((A\cup B)\cup C)=n(A) + n(B) - n(A\cap B) - n(A\cap B \cap C)\]
@Mertsj Yeah But I just wanted to do it orderly.
For example: Let A = {1,2,3} B = {2,4,6} C = {8} Then A U B U C = {1,2,3,4,6,8}
Yes, the associative propertie.
ok then A U B U C = (A U B) U C or (A U C) U B
I didn't know how to get the number of elements of it.
depends on the number of elements in the individual sets.
|dw:1325361889434:dw|
I wanted to know on many elements the set \[A\cap B\cap C\] has.
I'm thinking
I think the formula is wrong =(
yeah I missed the \[n(C)\]
\[n(A\cup B\cup C)=n(A) + n(B) + n(C) - n(A\cap B) - n(A\cap B \cap C) \]
I guess that make sense.
n() means number of elements?
@myininaya Yes, is the number of elements.
Do you think I'm right?
Or Is there an easier way to calculate that?
I think I tend to overcomplicate things.
can't think of a way to explain it, but its the principle of inclusion-exclusion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion%E2%80%93exclusion_principle
\[n((A \cup B) \cup C)=n(A \cup B )+n(C)-n((A \cup B) \cap C)\] \[=n(A)+n(B)-n(A \cap B)+n(C)-n(A \cup (B \cap C))\] \[=n(A)+n(B)-n(A \cap B) +n(C)-[n(A)+n(B \cap C)-n(A \cap (B \cap C))]\] \[=n(A)+n(B)+n(C)-n(A)-n(B \cap C)-n(A \cap B)+n(A \cap B \cap C)\] \[=n(B)+n(C)-n(A \cap B) -n(B \cap C)+n(A \cap B \cap C)\] is this what you are looking for?
i think i made a mistake
when i was trying to derive the formula
cazil's link provides the correct formula to use
Yeah, I think my formula is wrong too.
I was trying to use the following thm (its about probability but I think it also works for the number of elements)... If C_1 and C_2 are events in C, then P(C_1 U C_2)=P(C_1)+P(C_2)-P(C_1 and C_2)
i tried to let A U B be event C_1 first and let C be event C_2
yeah it's the exact same principle for probability.
and plugged into the formula then I used this formula again
So did you get it, No-data?
omg I know what I did wrong...
No, I don't see why
I was following myininaya derivation.
Basically it says to add the number of each set , subtract the number in each intersection and then add back the number in the intersection of all three sets.
\[( A \cup B) \cap C=(A \cup B) \cap (B \cup C)\]
n(AUBUC)=n(a)+n(B)+n(C)-n(A intersect B)-n(A intersect C)- n(B intersect C) + n(A intersect B intersect C)
thats one part i messed up on i think i'm going to right this down again
Yes, I messed up on that part too!
Thank you myininaya
\[n(A\cup B\cup C)\] \[=n(A)+n(B)+n(C)-n(A \cap B) -n(B \cap C)-n(A\cap C)+n(A \cap B \cap C)\]
we know, we want to prove it though.
Yeah, satellite73 I didn't know the formula so I tried to derive it.
proof? venn diagrams will provide a proof i think element-wise will be a pain
Yes is a pain!
idea is you need to subtract off the intersections, just as you do with \[A\cup B\] but when you subtract all three you have subtracted of the interersection \[A\cap B\cap C\] three times so you have to add it back
That was mentioned earlier but I don't think it's quite what we're looking for. I think no-data wants a more formal proof.
ok i like proofs of these with venn diagrams, which to me count as a valid proof. in any case i think it is time for a glass of champagne enjoy the new year!
\[(A\cup B)\cap C \neq (A\cup B) \cap (B\cup C)\]
yes the signs are backwards
yeah, but I think i will enjoy this a lot more if we can figure out this haha.
\[(A\cup B)\cap C = (A\cap B) \cup (B\cap C)\]
are you sure? That seems to contradict the Venn I'm looking at.
\[(A\cup B)\cap C = (A\cap C)\cup (B\cap C)\]
Is some kind of distributive law...
darn right
stupid B
i meant the set B by the way
haha
Where are you guys finding the intersection symbol?
\cap
Finally!
(AUB) intersect C = A intersect C + B intersect C - A intersect B intersect C
ok okay what about this: Pretend again we have events C_1 and C_2 in C so we know we can write \[C_1 \cup C_2=C_1 \cup (C^c_1 \cap C_2) \text{ and } C_2=(C_1 \cap C_2) \cup (C^c_1 \cap C_2)\] Then \[n(C_1 \cup C_2)=n(C_1)+n(C^c_1 \cap C_2)\] and \[n(C_2)=n(C_1 \cap C_2)+n(C_1^c \cap C_2)\] so we can solve the second equation here for \[n(C_1^c \cap C_2)\] and plug into the first to get \[n(C_1 \cup C_2)=n(C_1)+n(C_2)-n(C_1 \cap C_2)\]
Did you wrote that myin? \[(A\cup B)\cap C=A\cap C + B\cap C - A\cap B \cap C\]
i don't recall writing that
Ahh no, it was mMertsj
I wrote that No-Data
Ok
I didn't understood quite wel the last equations you posted Myininaya.
I'm goin to post what i have , but i't will take me some time to type it.
I don't think I follow that proof either, how did you sub\[C_1\cup C_2\]for\[C_1\cup( C_1\cap C_2)\]???
what?
\[n((A\cup B) \cup C) = n(A\cup B) + n(C) - n((A\cup B)\cap C)\]
well you say they are equal, I don't see how.
i don't see how either i think i wrote something else not what you wrote unless i made a type-o
\[C_1 \cup C_2=C_1 \cup (C^c_1 \cap C_2) \text{ and } C_2=(C_1 \cap C_2) \cup (C^c_1 \cap C_2) \]
\[ n((A\cup B) \cup C) = n(A) + n(B) - n(A\cap B) - n((A\cup B)\cap C)\]
I don't really understand either of those statements with C...
\[(A\cup B)\cap C = (A\cap C)\cup(B\cap C)\] So.
\[C_1^c \cap C_2=C_2 \text{ is what i see} \]
Do you see this?
\[n((A\cup B)\cap C) = n((A\cap C)\cup(B\cap C))\]
the intersection of not C_1 and C_2 is C_2
You're almost there No-data. Now use: \[n((A∪B)∩C)=n((A ∩C)\cup(B∩C))\] \[=n(A∩C)+n(B∩C)-n((A∩C)∩(B∩C))\]
intersection and union are associative also
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!