Friday, July 8, 2016

SETS


Introduction

Forget everything you know about numbers. In fact, forget you even know what a number is. This is where mathematics starts. Instead of math with numbers, we will now think about math with "things"

Definition

It's a collection. First we specify a common property among "things" (this word will be defined later) and then we gather up all the "things" that have this common property

For example, the items you wear: shoes, socks, hat, shirt, pants, and so on. I'm sure you could come up with at least a hundred. This is known as a set

Or another example is types of fingers. This set includes index, middle, ring, and pinky.
 
So it is just things grouped together with a certain property in common

Notation

There is a fairly simple notation for sets. We simply list each element (or "member") separated by a comma, and then put some curly brackets around the whole thing:




The curly brackets { } are sometimes called "set brackets" or "braces".


This is the notation for the two previous examples:
{socks, shoes, watches, shirts, ...}
{index, middle, ring, pinky}
Notice how the first example has the "..." (three dots together)

The three dots ... are called an ellipsis, and mean "continue on".

Example


The set of letters:

{a, b, c, ..., x, y, z}
In this case it is a finite set (there are only 26 letters, right?)




Numerical Sets

So what does this have to do with mathematics? When we define a set, all we have to specify is a common characteristic. Who says we can't do so with numbers?

Set of even numbers: {..., -4, -2, 0, 2, 4, ...}
Set of odd numbers: {..., -3, -1, 1, 3, ...}
Set of prime numbers: {2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, ...}
Positive multiples of 3 that are less than 10: {3, 6, 9}
And the list goes on. We can come up with all different types of sets

There can also be sets of numbers that have no common property, they are just defined that way. 

For example:

{2, 3, 6, 828, 3839, 8827}
{4, 5, 6, 10, 21}
{2, 949, 48282, 42882959, 119484203}
Are all sets that I just randomly banged on my keyboard to produce


Universal Set

At the start we used the word "things" in quotes. We call this the universal set. It's a set that contains everything. Well, not exactly everything. Everything that is relevant to our question

Then our sets included integers. The universal set for that would be all the integers. In fact, when doing Number Theory, this is almost always what the universal set is, as Number Theory is simply the study of integers

However in Calculus (also known as real analysis), the universal set is almost always the real numbers. And in complex analysis, you guessed it, the universal set is the complex numbers





Equality

Two sets are equal if they have precisely the same members. Now, at first glance they may not seem equal, so we may have to examine them closely!

Example

Are A and B equal where:
  • A is the set whose members are the first four positive whole numbers
  • B = {4, 2, 1, 3}
Let's check. They both contain 1. They both contain 2. And 3, And 4. And we have checked every element of both sets, so: Yes, they are equal!

And the equals sign (=) is used to show equality, so we write:

A = B





Subsets

When we define a set, if we take pieces of that set, we can form what is called a subset.
So for example, we have the set {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}. A subset of this is {1, 2, 3}. Another subset is {3, 4} or even another, {1}. However, {1, 6} is not a subset, since it contains an element (6) which is not in the parent set. In general:

A is a subset of B if and only if every element of A is in B.

Example 

Is A a subset of B, where A = {1, 3, 4} and B = {1, 4, 3, 2}?

1 is in A, and 1 is in B as well. So far so good.
3 is in A and 3 is also in B.
4 is in A, and 4 is in B.
That's all the elements of A, and every single one is in B, so we're done.
Yes, A is a subset of B
Note that 2 is in B, but 2 is not in A. But remember, that doesn't matter, we only look at the elements in A.



Let A be all multiples of 4 and B be all multiples of 2. Is A a subset of B? And is B a subset of A?

Well, we can't check every element in these sets, because they have an infinite number of elements. So we need to get an idea of what the elements look like in each, and then compare them.
The sets are:
  • A = {..., -8, -4, 0, 4, 8, ...}
  • B = {..., -8, -6, -4, -2, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, ...}
By pairing off members of the two sets, we can see that every member of A is also a member of B, but every member of B is not a member of A:



pairing off A and B


So:
A is a subset of B, but B is not a subset of A


Why Are Sets Important?

Sets are the fundamental property of mathematics. Now as a word of warning, sets, by themselves, seem pretty pointless. But it's only when we apply sets in different situations do they become the powerful building block of mathematics that they are

Math can get amazingly complicated quite fast. Graph Theory, Abstract Algebra, Real Analysis, Complex Analysis, Linear Algebra, Number Theory, and the list goes on. But there is one thing that all of these share in common: Sets.







References:








LINEAR PROGRAMMING

Description
A linear programming is an optimization problem for which:
  • We attempt to maximize (or minimize) a linear function of the decision variables
  • The values of the decision variables must satisfy a set of constraints, each of which must be a linear inequality or linear equality


Sketching the Solution Set of a Linear Inequality

To sketch the region represented by a linear inequality in 2 variables:

  1. Sketch the straight line obtained by replacing the inequality with an equality
  2. Choose a test point not on the line ((0,0) is a good choice if the line does not pass through the origin, and if the line does pass through the origin a point on one of the axes would be a good choice)
  3. If the test point satisfies the inequality, then the set of solutions is the entire region on the same side of the line as the test point. Otherwise it is the region on the other side of the line. In either case, shade out the side that does not contain the solutions, leaving the solution region showing


Example

Find the maximum value of
p = 3x - 2y + 4z
subject to

4x + 3y - z ≥ 3 x + 2y + z ≤ 4 x ≥ 0, y ≥ 0, z ≥ 0

The objective function is p = 3x - 2y + 4z. The constraints are

4x + 3y - z ≥ 3 x + 2y + z ≤ 4 x ≥ 0, y ≥ 0, z ≥ 0





3x - 4y ≤ 12

1st, sketch the line 3x - 4y = 12



2nd, choose the origin (0, 0) as the test point (since it is not on the line). Substituting x = 0, y = 0 in the inequality gives:
    3(0) - 4(0) ≤ 12

Since this is a true statement, (0, 0) is in the solution set, so the solution set consists of all points on the same side as (0, 0). This region is left unshaded, while the (grey) shaded region is blocked out










The feasible region for the following collection of inequalities is the unshaded region shown below (including its boundary).


3x - 4y ≤ 12
x + 2y ≥ 4
x ≥ 1 y ≥ 0









The following is a standard maximization problem:
    Maximize P = 2x - 3y + z subject to
    4x - 3y + z ≤ 3
    x + y + z ≤ 10
    x ≥ 0, y ≥ 0, z ≥ 0
The following is not a standard maximization problem:
    Maximize P = 2x - 3y + z subject to
    4x - 3y + z ≥ 3
    x + y + z ≤ 10
    x ≥ 0, y ≥ 0, z ≥ 0