- You are here
- Everything Explained.Today
- A-Z Contents
- S
- SE
- SET
- Set (mathematics)

In mathematics, a **set** is a collection of elements.^{[1]} ^{[2]} ^{[3]} The elements that make up a set can be any kind of mathematical objects: numbers, symbols, points in space, lines, other geometrical shapes, variables, or even other sets. The set with no element is the empty set; a set with a single element is a singleton. A set may have a finite number of elements or be an infinite set. Two sets are equal if and only if they have precisely the same elements.^{[4]}

Sets are ubiquitous in modern mathematics. Indeed, set theory, more specifically Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, has been the standard way to provide rigorous foundations for all branches of mathematics since the first half of the 20th century.

See main article: Set theory. The concept of a set emerged in mathematics at the end of the 19th century.^{[5]} The German word for set, *Menge*, was coined by Bernard Bolzano in his work *Paradoxes of the Infinite*.^{[6]} ^{[7]} ^{[8]} Georg Cantor, one of the founders of set theory, gave the following definition at the beginning of his *Beiträge zur Begründung der transfiniten Mengenlehre*:^{[9]}

Bertrand Russell called a set a *class*: "When mathematicians deal with what they call a manifold, aggregate, *Menge*, *ensemble*, or some equivalent name, it is common, especially where the number of terms involved is finite, to regard the object in question (which is in fact a class) as defined by the enumeration of its terms, and as consisting possibly of a single term, which is in that case *is* the class."^{[10]}

See main article: Naive set theory. The foremost property of a set is that it can have elements, also called *members*. Two sets are equal when they have the same elements. More precisely, sets *A* and *B* are equal if every element of *A* is a member of *B*, and every element of *B* is an element of *A*; this property is called the *extensionality of sets*.

The simple concept of a set has proved enormously useful in mathematics, but paradoxes arise if no restrictions are placed on how sets can be constructed:

- Russell's paradox shows that the "set of all sets that
*do not contain themselves*", i.e.,, cannot exist. - Cantor's paradox shows that "the set of all sets" cannot exist.

Naïve set theory defines a set as any *well-defined* collection of distinct elements, but problems arise from the vagueness of the term *well-defined*.

In subsequent efforts to resolve these paradoxes since the time of the original formulation of naïve set theory, the properties of sets have been defined by axioms. Axiomatic set theory takes the concept of a set as a primitive notion.^{[11]} The purpose of the axioms is to provide a basic framework from which to deduce the truth or falsity of particular mathematical propositions (statements) about sets, using first-order logic. According to Gödel's incompleteness theorems however, it is not possible to use first-order logic to prove any such particular axiomatic set theory is free from paradox.

Mathematical texts commonly denote sets by capital letters^{[12]} in italic, such as,, .^{[13]} ^{[14]} A set may also be called a *collection* or *family*, especially when its elements are themselves sets.

**Roster** or **enumeration notation** defines a set by listing its elements between curly brackets, separated by commas:^{[15]} ^{[16]} ^{[17]} ^{[18]}

.

In a set, all that matters is whether each element is in it or not, so the ordering of the elements in roster notation is irrelevant (in contrast, in a sequence, a tuple, or a permutation of a set, the ordering of the terms matters). For example, and represent the same set.^{[19]} ^{[20]}

For sets with many elements, especially those following an implicit pattern, the list of members can be abbreviated using an ellipsis ‘’.^{[21]} ^{[22]} For instance, the set of the first thousand positive integers may be specified in roster notation as

.

An infinite set is a set with an endless list of elements. To describe an infinite set in roster notation, an ellipsis is placed at the end of the list, or at both ends, to indicate that the list continues forever. For example, the set of nonnegative integers is

and the set of all integers is

Another way to define a set is to use a rule to determine what the elements are:

Let be the set whose members are the first four positive integers.

Let be the set of colors of the French flag.

Such a definition is called a *semantic description*.^{[23]}

See main article: Set-builder notation.

Set-builder notation specifies a set as a selection from a larger set, determined by a condition on the elements.^{[23]} ^{[24]} ^{[25]} For example, a set can be defined as follows:

=*\{n**\mid**n*isaninteger,and0*\leq**n**\leq*19*\}.*

In this notation, the vertical bar "|" means "such that", and the description can be interpreted as " is the set of all numbers such that is an integer in the range from 0 to 19 inclusive". Some authors use a colon ":" instead of the vertical bar.^{[26]}

Philosophy uses specific terms to classify types of definitions:

- An
*intensional definition*uses a*rule*to determine membership. Semantic definitions and definitions using set-builder notation are examples. - An
*extensional definition*describes a set by*listing all its elements*.^{[23]}Such definitions are also called*enumerative*. - An
*ostensive definition*is one that describes a set by giving*examples*of elements; a roster involving an ellipsis would be an example.

See main article: Element (mathematics). If is a set and is an element of, this is written in shorthand as, which can also be read as “*x* belongs to *B*”, or “*x* is in *B*”. The statement “*y* is not an element of *B*” is written as, which can also be read as or “*y* is not in *B*”.^{[27]} ^{[28]}

For example, with respect to the sets,, and,

and ; and

and .

See main article: Empty set. The *empty set* (or *null set*) is the unique set that has no members. It is denoted or

*\emptyset*

See main article: Singleton (mathematics). A *singleton set* is a set with exactly one element; such a set may also be called a *unit set*.^{[4]} Any such set can be written as, where *x* is the element.The set and the element *x* mean different things; Halmos draws the analogy that a box containing a hat is not the same as the hat.

See main article: Subset. If every element of set *A* is also in *B*, then *A* is described as being a *subset of B*, or *contained in B*, written *A* ⊆ *B*,^{[32]} or *B* ⊇ *A*.^{[33]} The latter notation may be read *B contains A*, *B includes A*, or *B is a superset of A*. The relationship between sets established by ⊆ is called *inclusion* or *containment*. Two sets are equal if they contain each other: *A* ⊆ *B* and *B* ⊆ *A* is equivalent to *A* = *B*.^{[24]}

If *A* is a subset of *B*, but *A* is not equal to *B*, then *A* is called a *proper subset* of *B*. This can be written *A* ⊊ *B*. Likewise, *B* ⊋ *A* means *B is a proper superset of A*, i.e. *B* contains *A*, and is not equal to *A*.

A third pair of operators ⊂ and ⊃ are used differently by different authors: some authors use *A* ⊂ *B* and *B* ⊃ *A* to mean *A* is any subset of *B* (and not necessarily a proper subset),^{[27]} while others reserve *A* ⊂ *B* and *B* ⊃ *A* for cases where *A* is a proper subset of *B*.^{[32]}

Examples:

- The set of all humans is a proper subset of the set of all mammals.
- ⊂ .
- ⊆ .

The empty set is a subset of every set, and every set is a subset of itself:

- ∅ ⊆
*A*. *A*⊆*A*.

An Euler diagram is a graphical representation of a collection of sets; each set is depicted as a planar region enclosed by a loop, with its elements inside. If is a subset of, then the region representing is completely inside the region representing . If two sets have no elements in common, the regions do not overlap.

A Venn diagram, in contrast, is a graphical representation of sets in which the loops divide the plane into zones such that for each way of selecting some of the sets (possibly all or none), there is a zone for the elements that belong to all the selected sets and none of the others. For example, if the sets are,, and, there should be a zone for the elements that are inside and and outside (even if such elements do not exist).

There are sets of such mathematical importance, to which mathematicians refer so frequently, that they have acquired special names and notational conventions to identify them.

Many of these important sets are represented in mathematical texts using bold (e.g.

*\bold**Z*

Z

*\bold**N*

N

*\bold**N*=*\{*0*,*1*,*2*,*3*,...\}*

*\bold**Z*

Z

*\bold**Z*=*\{...,*-2*,*-1*,*0*,*1*,*2*,*3*,...\}*

*\bold**Q*

Q

*\bold**Q*=*\left\{*

a | |

b |

*\mid**a,b\in\bold**Z,b\ne*0*\right\}*

*\bold**R*

R

*\sqrt*2

*\bold**C*

C

Each of the above sets of numbers has an infinite number of elements. Each is a subset of the sets listed below it.

Sets of positive or negative numbers are sometimes denoted by superscript plus and minus signs, respectively. For example,

Q^{+}

A *function* (or *mapping*) from a set to a set is a rule that assigns to each "input" element of an "output" that is an element of ; more formally, a function is a special kind of relation, one that relates each element of to *exactly one* element of . A function is called

- injective (or one-to-one) if it maps any two different elements of to
*different*elements of, - surjective (or onto) if for every element of, there is at least one element of that maps to it, and
- bijective (or a one-to-one correspondence) if the function is both injective and surjective — in this case, each element of is paired with a unique element of, and each element of is paired with a unique element of, so that there are no unpaired elements.

An injective function is called an *injection*, a surjective function is called a *surjection*, and a bijective function is called a *bijection* or *one-to-one correspondence*.

See main article: Cardinality.

The cardinality of a set, denoted, is the number of members of .^{[35]} For example, if, then . Repeated members in roster notation are not counted,^{[36]} ^{[37]} so, too.

More formally, two sets share the same cardinality if there exists a one-to-one correspondence between them.

The cardinality of the empty set is zero.^{[38]}

The list of elements of some sets is endless, or *infinite*. For example, the set

*\N*

Some infinite cardinalities are greater than others. Arguably one of the most significant results from set theory is that the set of real numbers has greater cardinality than the set of natural numbers.^{[39]} Sets with cardinality less than or equal to that of

*\N*

*\N*

*\N*

However, it can be shown that the cardinality of a straight line (i.e., the number of points on a line) is the same as the cardinality of any segment of that line, of the entire plane, and indeed of any finite-dimensional Euclidean space.^{[40]}

See main article: Continuum Hypothesis. The Continuum Hypothesis, formulated by Georg Cantor in 1878, is the statement that there is no set with cardinality strictly between the cardinality of the natural numbers and the cardinality of a straight line.^{[41]} In 1963, Paul Cohen proved that the Continuum Hypothesis is independent of the axiom system ZFC consisting of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice.^{[42]} (ZFC is the most widely-studied version of axiomatic set theory.)

See main article: Power set. The power set of a set is the set of all subsets of . The empty set and itself are elements of the power set of, because these are both subsets of . For example, the power set of is . The power set of a set is commonly written as or .

If has elements, then has elements. For example, has three elements, and its power set has elements, as shown above.

If is infinite (whether countable or uncountable), then is uncountable. Moreover, the power set is always strictly “bigger” than the original set, in the sense that any attempt to pair up the elements of with the elements of will leave some elements of unpaired. (There is never a bijection from onto .)^{[43]}

See main article: Partition of a set.

A partition of a set *S* is a set of nonempty subsets of *S*, such that every element *x* in *S* is in exactly one of these subsets. That is, the subsets are pairwise disjoint (meaning any two sets of the partition contain no element in common), and the union of all the subsets of the partition is *S*.^{[44]}

See main article: Algebra of sets.

There are several fundamental operations for constructing new sets from given sets.

See main article: Union (set theory). Two sets can be joined: the *union* of and, denoted by, is the set of all things that are members of *A* or of *B* or of both.

Examples:

**Some basic properties of unions:**

See main article: Intersection (set theory). A new set can also be constructed by determining which members two sets have "in common". The *intersection* of *A* and *B*, denoted by is the set of all things that are members of both *A* and *B*. If then *A* and *B* are said to be *disjoint*.

Examples:

**Some basic properties of intersections:**

See main article: Complement (set theory). Two sets can also be "subtracted". The *relative complement* of *B* in *A* (also called the *set-theoretic difference* of *A* and *B*), denoted by (or), is the set of all elements that are members of *A,* but not members of *B*. It is valid to "subtract" members of a set that are not in the set, such as removing the element *green* from the set ; doing so will not affect the elements in the set.

In certain settings, all sets under discussion are considered to be subsets of a given universal set *U*. In such cases, is called the *absolute complement* or simply *complement* of *A*, and is denoted by *A*′ or A^{c}.

Examples:

- If
*U*is the set of integers,*E*is the set of even integers, and*O*is the set of odd integers, then*U*\*E*=*E*′ =*O*.

- If

Some basic properties of complements include the following:

- for .
- and

- and
- .
- if then

An extension of the complement is the symmetric difference, defined for sets *A*, *B* as

*A\DeltaB*=*(A**\setminus**B)**\cup**(B**\setminus**A).*

See main article: Cartesian product. A new set can be constructed by associating every element of one set with every element of another set. The *Cartesian product* of two sets *A* and *B*, denoted by *A* × *B,* is the set of all ordered pairs (*a*, *b*) such that *a* is a member of *A* and *b* is a member of *B*.

Examples:

Some basic properties of Cartesian products:

Let *A* and *B* be finite sets; then the cardinality of the Cartesian product is the product of the cardinalities:

- | 
*A*×*B* | = | *B*×*A* | = | *A* | × | *B* |.

Sets are ubiquitous in modern mathematics. For example, structures in abstract algebra, such as groups, fields and rings, are sets closed under one or more operations.

One of the main applications of naive set theory is in the construction of relations. A relation from a domain to a codomain is a subset of the Cartesian product . For example, considering the set of shapes in the game of the same name, the relation “beats” from to is the set ; thus beats in the game if the pair is a member of . Another example is the set of all pairs, where is real. This relation is a subset of, because the set of all squares is subset of the set of all real numbers. Since for every in, one and only one pair is found in, it is called a function. In functional notation, this relation can be written as .

See main article: Inclusion–exclusion principle.

The inclusion–exclusion principle is a counting technique that can be used to count the number of elements in a union of two sets—if the size of each set and the size of their intersection are known. It can be expressed symbolically as

*|A**\cup**B|*=*|A|*+*|B|*-*|A**\cap**B|.*

A more general form of the principle can be used to find the cardinality of any finite union of sets:

*\begin{align}
\left|A*_{1}*\cup**A*_{2}*\cup**A*_{3}*\cup\ldots\cup**A*_{n}*\right|*=*&**\left(\left|A*_{1}*\right|*+*\left|A*_{2}*\right|*+*\left|A*_{3}*\right|*+*\ldots\left|A*_{n}*\right|\right)**\\
&{}*-*\left(\left|A*_{1}*\cap**A*_{2}*\right|*+*\left|A*_{1}*\cap**A*_{3}*\right|*+*\ldots\left|A*_{n-1}*\cap**A*_{n}*\right|\right)**\\
&{}*+*\ldots**\\
&{}*+*\left(*-1*\right)*^{n-1}*\left(\left|A*_{1}*\cap**A*_{2}*\cap**A*_{3}*\cap\ldots\cap**A*_{n}*\right|\right).
\end{align}*

Augustus De Morgan stated two laws about sets.

If and are any two sets then,

The complement of union equals the complement of intersected with the complement of .

The complement of intersected with is equal to the complement of union to the complement of .

- Algebra of sets
- Alternative set theory
- Category of sets
- Class (set theory)
- Dense set
- Family of sets
- Fuzzy set
- Internal set
- Mereology
- Multiset
- Principia Mathematica
- Rough set

- Book: Dauben, Joseph W. . Joseph Dauben . Georg Cantor: His Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite . Boston . . 1979 . 0-691-02447-2 . registration .
- Book: Halmos, Paul R. . Paul Halmos . Naive Set Theory . registration . Princeton, N.J. . Van Nostrand . 1960 . 0-387-90092-6 .
- Book: Stoll, Robert R. . Set Theory and Logic . Mineola, N.Y. . . 1979 . 0-486-63829-4 .
- Book: Velleman, Daniel . How To Prove It: A Structured Approach . . 2006 . 0-521-67599-5 .

- Book: P. K. Jain. Khalil Ahmad. Om P. Ahuja. Functional Analysis. 1995. New Age International. 978-81-224-0801-0. 1.
- Book: Samuel Goldberg. Probability: An Introduction. 1 January 1986. Courier Corporation. 978-0-486-65252-8. 2.
- Book: Thomas H. Cormen. Charles E Leiserson. Ronald L Rivest. Clifford Stein. Introduction To Algorithms. 2001. MIT Press. 978-0-262-03293-3. 1070.
- Book: Stoll, Robert . Sets, Logic and Axiomatic Theories . 1974 . W. H. Freeman and Company . 5 . 9780716704577 . registration.
- Book: José Ferreirós. Labyrinth of Thought: A History of Set Theory and Its Role in Modern Mathematics. 16 August 2007. Birkhäuser Basel. 978-3-7643-8349-7.
- Book: Steve Russ. The Mathematical Works of Bernard Bolzano. 9 December 2004. OUP Oxford. 978-0-19-151370-1.
- Book: William Ewald. William Bragg Ewald. From Kant to Hilbert Volume 1: A Source Book in the Foundations of Mathematics. 1996. OUP Oxford. 978-0-19-850535-8. 249.
- Book: Paul Rusnock. Jan Sebestík. Bernard Bolzano: His Life and Work. 25 April 2019. OUP Oxford. 978-0-19-255683-7. 430.
- "Eine Menge, ist die Zusammenfassung bestimmter, wohlunterschiedener Objekte unserer Anschauung oder unseres Denkens – welche Elemente der Menge genannt werden – zu einem Ganzen." Web site: Archived copy . 2011-04-22 . live . https://web.archive.org/web/20110610133240/http://brinkmann-du.de/mathe/fos/fos01_03.htm . 2011-06-10 .
- [Bertrand Russell]
- Book: Jose Ferreiros. Labyrinth of Thought: A History of Set Theory and Its Role in Modern Mathematics. 1 November 2001. Springer Science & Business Media. 978-3-7643-5749-8.
- Book: Seymor Lipschutz. Marc Lipson. Schaum's Outline of Discrete Mathematics. 22 June 1997. McGraw Hill Professional. 978-0-07-136841-4. 1.
- Web site: 2020-04-11. Comprehensive List of Set Theory Symbols. 2020-08-19. Math Vault. en-US.
- Web site: Introduction to Sets. 2020-08-19. www.mathsisfun.com.
- Book: Charles Roberts. Introduction to Mathematical Proofs: A Transition. 24 June 2009. CRC Press. 978-1-4200-6956-3. 45.
- Book: David Johnson. David B. Johnson. Thomas A. Mowry. Finite Mathematics: Practical Applications (Docutech Version). June 2004. W. H. Freeman. 978-0-7167-6297-3. 220.
- Book: Ignacio Bello. Anton Kaul. Jack R. Britton. Topics in Contemporary Mathematics. 29 January 2013. Cengage Learning. 978-1-133-10742-2. 47.
- Book: Susanna S. Epp. Discrete Mathematics with Applications. 4 August 2010. Cengage Learning. 978-0-495-39132-6. 13.
- Book: Stephen B. Maurer. Anthony Ralston. Discrete Algorithmic Mathematics. 21 January 2005. CRC Press. 978-1-4398-6375-6. 11.
- Book: D. Van Dalen. H. C. Doets. H. De Swart. Sets: Naïve, Axiomatic and Applied: A Basic Compendium with Exercises for Use in Set Theory for Non Logicians, Working and Teaching Mathematicians and Students. 9 May 2014. Elsevier Science. 978-1-4831-5039-0. 1.
- Book: Alfred Basta. Stephan DeLong. Nadine Basta. Mathematics for Information Technology. 1 January 2013. Cengage Learning. 978-1-285-60843-3. 3.
- Book: Laura Bracken. Ed Miller. Elementary Algebra. 15 February 2013. Cengage Learning. 978-0-618-95134-5. 36.
- Book: Frank Ruda. Hegel's Rabble: An Investigation into Hegel's Philosophy of Right. 6 October 2011. Bloomsbury Publishing. 978-1-4411-7413-0. 151.
- Book: John F. Lucas. Introduction to Abstract Mathematics. 1990. Rowman & Littlefield. 978-0-912675-73-2. 108.
- Web site: Weisstein. Eric W.. Set. 2020-08-19. mathworld.wolfram.com. en.
- Book: Ralph C. Steinlage. College Algebra. 1987. West Publishing Company. 978-0-314-29531-6.
- Book: Marek Capinski. Peter E. Kopp. Measure, Integral and Probability. 2004. Springer Science & Business Media. 978-1-85233-781-0. 2.
- Web site: Set Symbols. 2020-08-19. www.mathsisfun.com.
- Book: K.T. Leung. Doris Lai-chue Chen. Elementary Set Theory, Part I/II. 1 July 1992. Hong Kong University Press. 978-962-209-026-2. 27.
- Book: Aggarwal, M.L.. Understanding ISC Mathematics Class XI. 1. Arya Publications (Avichal Publishing Company). 2021. 1. Sets. A=3.
- Book: Sourendra Nath, De. Chhaya Ganit (Ekadash Shreni). Scholar Books Pvt. Ltd.. January 2015. Unit-1 Sets and Functions: 1. Set Theory. 5.
- Book: Felix Hausdorff. Set Theory. 2005. American Mathematical Soc.. 978-0-8218-3835-8. 30.
- Book: Peter Comninos. Mathematical and Computer Programming Techniques for Computer Graphics. 6 April 2010. Springer Science & Business Media. 978-1-84628-292-8. 7.
- Book: George Tourlakis. Lectures in Logic and Set Theory: Volume 2, Set Theory. 13 February 2003. Cambridge University Press. 978-1-139-43943-5. 137.
- Book: Yiannis N. Moschovakis. Notes on Set Theory. 1994. Springer Science & Business Media. 978-3-540-94180-4.
- Book: Arthur Charles Fleck. Formal Models of Computation: The Ultimate Limits of Computing. 2001. World Scientific. 978-981-02-4500-9. 3.
- Book: William Johnston. The Lebesgue Integral for Undergraduates. 25 September 2015. The Mathematical Association of America. 978-1-939512-07-9. 7.
- Book: Karl J. Smith. Mathematics: Its Power and Utility. 7 January 2008. Cengage Learning. 978-0-495-38913-2. 401.
- Book: John Stillwell. The Real Numbers: An Introduction to Set Theory and Analysis. 16 October 2013. Springer Science & Business Media. 978-3-319-01577-4.
- Book: David Tall. Advanced Mathematical Thinking. 11 April 2006. Springer Science & Business Media. 978-0-306-47203-9. 211.
- Georg . Cantor . Ein Beitrag zur Mannigfaltigkeitslehre . . 1878 . 84 . 1878 . 242–258 . 10.1515/crll.1878.84.242.
- Paul J. . Cohen . The Independence of the Continuum Hypothesis . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 50 . 6 . December 15, 1963 . 1143–1148 . 10.1073/pnas.50.6.1143 . 16578557 . 221287 . 71858 . 1963PNAS...50.1143C. free .
- Book: Edward B. Burger. Michael Starbird. The Heart of Mathematics: An invitation to effective thinking. 18 August 2004. Springer Science & Business Media. 978-1-931914-41-3. 183.
- Book: Toufik Mansour. Combinatorics of Set Partitions. 27 July 2012. CRC Press. 978-1-4398-6333-6.