Teleport

Main features

On this page

Topics

Arithmetic drills
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Math I
Math A
Math II
Math B
Math C
Math III
Calculus
Linear algebra
Differential equations

Display

Theme
Math I

Sets and Propositions: Practice Problems and Methods

Use Venn diagrams and number lines for sets, and think of conditions as sets: deciding necessary and sufficient conditions then becomes a question of inclusion.

Basic, Standard, Advanced: Grade 10 · Term 1

Math problem generator

Level

Set operations and counting

A∩BA \cap B (intersection) means "in AA and in BB", A∪BA \cup B (union) means "in AA or in BB", and A‾\overline{A} (complement) is everything in the universal set not in AA.

De Morgan's laws and counting
A∪B‾=A‾∩B‾,A∩B‾=A‾∪B‾\overline{A \cup B} = \overline{A} \cap \overline{B},\qquad \overline{A \cap B} = \overline{A} \cup \overline{B}
n(A∪B)=n(A)+n(B)−n(A∩B)n(A \cup B) = n(A) + n(B) - n(A \cap B)

Example: among the integers 1 to 100, 50+33−16=6750 + 33 - 16 = 67 are divisible by 2 or 3.

Necessary and sufficient conditions

If "p⇒qp \Rightarrow q" is true, then pp is a sufficient condition for qq, and qq is a necessary condition for pp. If both directions hold, the condition is necessary and sufficient.

Think in sets

If PP and QQ are the sets satisfying pp and qq, then "p⇒qp \Rightarrow q is true"   ⟺  P⊂Q\iff P \subset Q. For pp: x>3x > 3 and qq: x>1x > 1, P⊂QP \subset Q, so pp is sufficient for qq.

To show an implication is false, one counterexample is enough: x2=4⇒x=2x^2 = 4 \Rightarrow x = 2 fails for x=−2x = -2.

Negation, converse, inverse and contrapositive

The negation of "pp and qq" is "not pp or not qq", and the negation of "for every xx, pp" is "for some xx, not pp".

For "p⇒qp \Rightarrow q", the converse is "q⇒pq \Rightarrow p", the inverse is "not p⇒p \Rightarrow not qq" and the contrapositive is "not q⇒q \Rightarrow not pp". A statement and its contrapositive are always both true or both false, so a hard statement can be proved through its contrapositive. Proving that 2\sqrt{2} is irrational by assuming the opposite and reaching a contradiction is proof by contradiction.