|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| In [[mathematics]], a '''finite set''' is a [[Set (mathematics)|set]] that has a finite number of [[element (mathematics)|elements]]. For example,
| |
| :<math>\{2,4,6,8,10\}\,\!</math>
| |
| is a finite set with five elements. The number of elements of a finite set is a [[natural number]] ([[non-negative]] [[integer]]), and is called the [[cardinality]] of the set. A set that is not finite is called '''infinite'''. For example, the set of all positive integers is infinite:
| |
| :<math>\{1,2,3,\ldots\}.</math>
| |
| Finite sets are particularly important in [[combinatorics]], the mathematical study of [[counting]]. Many arguments involving finite sets rely on the [[pigeonhole principle]], which states that there cannot exist an [[injective function]] from a larger finite set to a smaller finite set.
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Definition and terminology==
| |
| Formally, a set ''S'' is called '''finite''' if there exists a [[bijection]]
| |
| :<math>f\colon S\rightarrow\{1,\ldots,n\}</math>
| |
| for some natural number ''n''. The number ''n'' is called the [[cardinality]] of the set, and is denoted |''S''|. (Note that the [[empty set]] is considered finite, with cardinality zero.) If a set is finite, its elements may be written as a [[sequence]]:
| |
| :<math>S = \{x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n\}.</math>
| |
| In [[combinatorics]], a finite set with ''n'' elements is sometimes called an ''n-set'' and a subset with ''k'' elements is called a ''k-subset''. For example, the set {5,6,7} is a 3-set, a finite set with three elements, and {6,7} is a 2-subset of it.
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Basic properties==
| | No business can grow without an successful and higher level telecommunications infrastructure in its offices and factories. All employees need a [https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=communication+device communication device] to save your self work-time and maintain their productivity. Certainly it indicates the place of a comprehensive telecom community in your offices. Clicking [http://tmall828.info/2014/08/15/do-you-get-much-more-spam-than-genuine-e-mail/ rate us] likely provides tips you might use with your uncle. A big chunk of your budget needs to be designated for the effective operation and optimum utilization of telecom sources. You"ll need to steadfastly keep up another division to oversee the performance of the telecom network and its finances. <br><br>Which means that you can employ a staff of expert auditors to watch on the billing of the phone vendors, in-house misuse or fraud in using the network devices, and frequent contact with the vendors with appropriate references to the anomalies within their billing. And in case the overcharged bills have been settled, they"ll have to be restored or paid into your consideration. Your in-house team needs to do a detailed planning of your telecom network and make crucial and timely decisions about the financial allocations to implement the plans. Besides auditing the billing and other financial aspects, your auditors also can use the computer software to automatically review and verify the invoices. <br><br>You need to also note that building a telecom network is really a very complex and confusing affair as the information arises from a number of sources, such as for instance agreements, invoices, suppliers and consumer services. The program can easily analyze this data, which is really a challenging task for your residential auditors and can encroach upon their time, which can become more usefully used on other crucial factors. The application can consequently reduce the time-consuming manual processes and increase productivity. Should you choose to be taught supplementary info on [http://armorgames.com/user/metaltank52 purchase here], we recommend many online libraries people should consider pursuing. It can also show and track unresolved billing errors. <br><br>Inspite of the step by step and comprehensively developed application that you might be using, it cannot handle unexpected billing dilemmas. It is here your Residential Telecom Audit Team may part of. It may make sure your business is getting the maximum services from your own telecom infrastructure and network. It should help rein in the charges, besides including the latest technologies to enhance the returns on investments and replacing the obsolete telecom products by getting the latest types. In this way your Residential Audits team can organize the whole telecom environment to market the [http://www.google.Co.uk/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=progress&gs_l=news progress] of one"s organization..<br><br>Should you loved this informative article and you want to receive much more information relating to [http://guiltlessunderc57.deviantart.com social health] please visit the web-site. |
| Any proper [[subset]] of a finite set ''S'' is finite and has fewer elements than ''S'' itself. As a consequence, there cannot exist a [[bijection]] between a finite set ''S'' and a proper subset of ''S''. Any set with this property is called [[Dedekind-finite]]. Using the standard [[Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory|ZFC]] axioms for [[set theory]], every Dedekind-finite set is also finite, but this requires the [[axiom of choice]] (or at least the [[axiom of countable choice]]).
| |
| | |
| Any [[injective function]] between two finite sets of the same cardinality is also a [[surjective function|surjection]], and similarly any surjection between two finite sets of the same cardinality is also an injection.
| |
| | |
| The [[union (set theory)|union]] of two finite sets is finite, with
| |
| :<math>|S\cup T| \le |S| + |T|.</math> | |
| In fact:
| |
| :<math>|S\cup T| = |S| + |T| - |S\cap T|.</math>
| |
| More generally, the union of any finite number of finite sets is finite. The [[Cartesian product]] of finite sets is also finite, with:
| |
| :<math>|S\times T| = |S|\times|T|.</math>
| |
| Similarly, the Cartesian product of finitely many finite sets is finite. A finite set with ''n'' elements has 2<sup>''n''</sup> distinct subsets. That is, the
| |
| [[power set]] of a finite set is finite, with cardinality 2<sup>''n''</sup>.
| |
| | |
| Any subset of a finite set is finite. The set of values of a function when applied to elements of a finite set is finite.
| |
| | |
| All finite sets are [[countable]], but not all countable sets are finite. (However, some authors use "countable" to mean "countably infinite", and thus do not consider finite sets to be countable.)
| |
| | |
| The [[free semilattice]] over a finite set is the set of its non-empty subsets, with the join operation being given by set union.
| |
| | |
| ==Necessary and sufficient conditions for finiteness== | |
| In [[Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory]] (ZF), the following conditions are all equivalent:{{Citation needed|date=October 2009}}
| |
| | |
| # ''S'' is a finite set. That is, ''S'' can be placed into a one-to-one correspondence with the set of those natural numbers less than some specific natural number.
| |
| # ([[Kazimierz Kuratowski]]) ''S'' has all properties which can be proved by mathematical induction beginning with the empty set and adding one new element at a time. (See the section on foundational issues for the set-theoretical formulation of Kuratowski finiteness.)
| |
| # ([[Paul Stäckel]]) ''S'' can be given a total ordering which is [[well-order]]ed both forwards and backwards. That is, every non-empty subset of ''S'' has both a least and a greatest element in the subset.
| |
| # Every one-to-one function from P(P(''S'')) into itself is onto. That is, the [[powerset]] of the powerset of ''S'' is Dedekind-finite (see below).
| |
| # Every surjective function from P(P(''S'')) onto itself is one-to-one.
| |
| # ([[Alfred Tarski]]) Every non-empty family of subsets of ''S'' has a minimal element with respect to inclusion.
| |
| # ''S'' can be well-ordered and any two well-orderings on it are [[order isomorphic]]. In other words, the well-orderings on ''S'' have exactly one [[order type]].
| |
| | |
| If the [[axiom of choice]] is also assumed (the [[axiom of countable choice]] is sufficient{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}}), then the following conditions are all equivalent:
| |
| | |
| # ''S'' is a finite set.
| |
| # ([[Richard Dedekind]]) Every one-to-one function from ''S'' into itself is onto.
| |
| # Every surjective function from ''S'' onto itself is one-to-one.
| |
| # ''S'' is empty or every [[partial order]]ing of ''S'' contains a [[maximal element]].
| |
| | |
| == Foundational issues ==
| |
| [[Georg Cantor]] initiated his theory of sets in order to provide a mathematical treatment of infinite sets. Thus the distinction between the finite and the infinite lies at the core of set theory. Certain foundationalists, the [[finitism|strict finitists]], reject the existence of infinite sets and thus advocate a mathematics based solely on finite sets. Mainstream mathematicians consider strict finitism too confining, but acknowledge its relative consistency: the universe of [[hereditarily finite set]]s constitutes a model of [[Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory]] with the [[axiom of infinity]] replaced by its negation.
| |
| | |
| Even for those mathematicians who embrace infinite sets, in certain important contexts, the formal distinction between the finite and the infinite can remain a delicate matter. The difficulty stems from [[Gödel's incompleteness theorems]]. One can interpret the theory of hereditarily finite sets within [[Peano arithmetic]] (and certainly also vice-versa), so the incompleteness of the theory of Peano arithmetic implies that of the theory of hereditarily finite sets. In particular, there exists a plethora of so-called [[non-standard models]] of both theories. A seeming paradox, non-standard models of the theory of hereditarily finite sets contain infinite sets --- but these infinite sets look finite from within the model. (This can happen when the model lacks the sets or functions necessary to witness the infinitude of these sets.) On account of the incompleteness theorems, no first-order predicate, nor even any recursive scheme of first-order predicates, can characterize the standard part of all such models. So, at least from the point of view of first-order logic, one can only hope to characterize finiteness approximately.
| |
| | |
| More generally, informal notions like set, and particularly finite set, may receive interpretations across a range of [[formal system]]s varying in their axiomatics and logical apparatus. The best known axiomatic set theories include Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (ZF), Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with the Axiom of Choice (ZFC), [[Von Neumann–Bernays–Gödel set theory]] (NBG), [[Non-well-founded set theory]], [[Bertrand Russell]]'s [[Type theory]] and all the theories of their various models. One may also choose among classical first-order logic, various higher-order logics and [[intuitionistic logic]].
| |
| | |
| A [[formalism (mathematics)|formalist]] might see the meaning of ''set'' varying from system to system. A [[Mathematical Platonism|Platonist]] might view particular formal systems as approximating an underlying reality.
| |
| | |
| ==Set-theoretic definitions of finiteness==
| |
| In contexts where the notion of [[natural number]] sits logically prior to any notion of set, one can define a set ''S'' as finite if ''S'' admits a [[bijection]] to some set of [[natural numbers]] of the form <math>\{x|x<n\}</math>. Mathematicians more typically choose to ground notions of number in [[set theory]], for example they might model natural numbers by the order types of finite [[well-ordered]] sets. Such an approach requires a structural definition of finiteness that does not depend on natural numbers.
| |
| | |
| Interestingly, various properties that single out the finite sets among all sets in the theory ZFC turn out logically inequivalent in weaker systems such as ZF or intuitionistic set theories. Two definitions feature prominently in the literature, one due to [[Richard Dedekind]], the other to [[Kazimierz Kuratowski]] (Kuratowski's is the definition used above).
| |
| | |
| A set ''S'' is called [[Dedekind infinite]] if there exists an injective, non-surjective function <math>f:S \rightarrow S</math>. Such a function exhibits a bijection between ''S'' and a proper subset of ''S'', namely the image of ''f''. Given a Dedekind infinite set ''S'', a function ''f'', and an element ''x'' that is not in the image of ''f'', we can form an infinite sequence of distinct elements of ''S'', namely <math>x,f(x),f(f(x)),...</math>. Conversely, given a sequence in ''S'' consisting of distinct elements <math>x_1,x_2,x_3,...</math>, we can define a function ''f'' such that on elements in the sequence <math>f(x_i)=x_{i+1}</math> and ''f'' behaves like the identity function otherwise. Thus Dedekind infinite sets contain subsets that correspond bijectively with the natural numbers. Dedekind finite naturally means that every injective self-map is also surjective.
| |
| | |
| Kuratowski finiteness is defined as follows. Given any set ''S'', the binary operation of union endows the [[powerset]] ''P(S)'' with the structure of a [[semi-lattice]]. Writing ''K(S)'' for the sub-semi-lattice generated by the [[empty set]] and the singletons, call set ''S'' Kuratowski finite if ''S'' itself belongs to ''K(S)''. Intuitively, ''K(S)'' consists of the finite subsets of ''S''. Crucially, one does not need induction, recursion or a definition of natural numbers to define ''generated by'' since one may obtain ''K(S)'' simply by taking the intersection of all sub-semi-lattices containing the empty set and the [[singleton (mathematics)|singletons]].
| |
| | |
| Readers unfamiliar with semi-lattices and other notions of abstract algebra may prefer an entirely elementary formulation. Kuratowski finite means ''S'' lies in the set ''K(S)'', constructed as follows. Write ''M'' for the set of all subsets ''X'' of P(''S'') such that:
| |
| * ''X'' contains the empty set;
| |
| * For every set ''T'' in P(''S''), if ''X'' contains ''T'' then ''X'' also contains the union of ''T'' with any singleton.
| |
| Then ''K(S)'' may be defined as the intersection of ''M''.
| |
| | |
| In ZF, Kuratowski finite implies Dedekind finite, but not vice-versa. In the parlance of a popular pedagogical formulation, when the axiom of choice fails badly, one may have an infinite family of socks with no way to choose one sock from more than finitely many of the pairs. That would make the set of such socks Dedekind finite: there can be no infinite sequence of socks, because such a sequence would allow a choice of one sock for infinitely many pairs by choosing the first sock in the sequence. However, Kuratowski finiteness would fail for the same set of socks. | |
| | |
| ==See also==
| |
| *[[FinSet]]
| |
| *[[Ordinal number]]
| |
| *[[Peano arithmetic]]
| |
| | |
| ==References==
| |
| *{{Citation|last=Suppes|first=Patrick|author-link=Patrick Suppes|year=1972|origyear=1960|title=Axiomatic Set Theory|publisher=Dover Publications Inc.|edition=Paperback|series=Dover Books on Mathematics|isbn=0-486-61630-4}}
| |
| *{{Citation | last=Herrlich | first=Horst |author-link=Horst Herrlich | title=Axiom of Choice | publisher = [[Springer Science+Business Media|Springer-Verlag]]| location=Berlin | year=2006 | series=Lecture Notes in Math. 1876 | isbn=3-540-30989-6 }}
| |
| *{{Citation|last=Dedekind|first=Richard|author-link=Richard Dedekind|year=2012|title=Was sind und was sollen die Zahlen?|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge, UK|edition=Paperback|series=Cambridge Library Collection|isbn=978-1-108-05038-8}}
| |
| **{{Citation|last=Dedekind|first=Richard|author-link=Richard Dedekind|others=Beman, Wooster Woodruff|year=1963|title=Essays on the Theory of Numbers|publisher=Dover Publications Inc.|edition=Paperback|series=Dover Books on Mathematics|isbn=0-486-21010-3}}
| |
| *{{Citation|last=Kuratowski|first=Kazimierz|author-link=Kazimierz Kuratowski|year=1920|title=Sur la notion d'ensemble fini|journal=[[Fundamenta Mathematicae]]|volume=1|publisher=|pages=129–131|url=http://matwbn.icm.edu.pl/ksiazki/fm/fm1/fm1117.pdf|format=PDF}}
| |
| *{{Citation|last=Tarski|first=Alfred|author-link=Alfred Tarski|year=1924|title=Sur les ensembles finis|journal=[[Fundamenta Mathematicae]]|volume=6|publisher=|pages=45–95|url=http://matwbn.icm.edu.pl/ksiazki/fm/fm6/fm619.pdf|format=PDF}}
| |
| | |
| == External links ==
| |
| *{{MathWorld |title=Finite Set |id=FiniteSet |author=[[Margherita Barile|Barile, Margherita]]}}
| |
| | |
| {{logic}}
| |
| {{Set theory}}
| |
| | |
| [[Category:Basic concepts in set theory]]
| |
| [[Category:Cardinal numbers]]
| |
No business can grow without an successful and higher level telecommunications infrastructure in its offices and factories. All employees need a communication device to save your self work-time and maintain their productivity. Certainly it indicates the place of a comprehensive telecom community in your offices. Clicking rate us likely provides tips you might use with your uncle. A big chunk of your budget needs to be designated for the effective operation and optimum utilization of telecom sources. You"ll need to steadfastly keep up another division to oversee the performance of the telecom network and its finances.
Which means that you can employ a staff of expert auditors to watch on the billing of the phone vendors, in-house misuse or fraud in using the network devices, and frequent contact with the vendors with appropriate references to the anomalies within their billing. And in case the overcharged bills have been settled, they"ll have to be restored or paid into your consideration. Your in-house team needs to do a detailed planning of your telecom network and make crucial and timely decisions about the financial allocations to implement the plans. Besides auditing the billing and other financial aspects, your auditors also can use the computer software to automatically review and verify the invoices.
You need to also note that building a telecom network is really a very complex and confusing affair as the information arises from a number of sources, such as for instance agreements, invoices, suppliers and consumer services. The program can easily analyze this data, which is really a challenging task for your residential auditors and can encroach upon their time, which can become more usefully used on other crucial factors. The application can consequently reduce the time-consuming manual processes and increase productivity. Should you choose to be taught supplementary info on purchase here, we recommend many online libraries people should consider pursuing. It can also show and track unresolved billing errors.
Inspite of the step by step and comprehensively developed application that you might be using, it cannot handle unexpected billing dilemmas. It is here your Residential Telecom Audit Team may part of. It may make sure your business is getting the maximum services from your own telecom infrastructure and network. It should help rein in the charges, besides including the latest technologies to enhance the returns on investments and replacing the obsolete telecom products by getting the latest types. In this way your Residential Audits team can organize the whole telecom environment to market the progress of one"s organization..
Should you loved this informative article and you want to receive much more information relating to social health please visit the web-site.