Is it possible to multiply a set by a natural number? [on hold]












9














Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.









  • 11




    Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
    – clathratus
    yesterday






  • 13




    You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
    – freakish
    yesterday








  • 21




    @fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
    – F.Carette
    yesterday






  • 1




    Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
    – DRF
    yesterday
















9














Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.









  • 11




    Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
    – clathratus
    yesterday






  • 13




    You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
    – freakish
    yesterday








  • 21




    @fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
    – F.Carette
    yesterday






  • 1




    Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
    – DRF
    yesterday














9












9








9


1





Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











Say I have a set $S={1, 4, 10, 7}$. Could I then multiply $S$ by $3$? Would that then look like $3S={3, 12, 30, 21}$? Any help would be really appreciated.







discrete-mathematics elementary-set-theory






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









clathratus

3,347331




3,347331






New contributor




Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









Hunter KimuraHunter Kimura

522




522




New contributor




Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Hunter Kimura is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




put on hold as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.




put on hold as off-topic by BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft, DRF, Cesareo, amWhy, Adrian Keister yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – DRF, amWhy, Adrian Keister

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.








  • 11




    Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
    – clathratus
    yesterday






  • 13




    You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
    – freakish
    yesterday








  • 21




    @fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
    – F.Carette
    yesterday






  • 1




    Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
    – DRF
    yesterday














  • 11




    Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
    – clathratus
    yesterday






  • 13




    You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
    – freakish
    yesterday








  • 21




    @fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
    – F.Carette
    yesterday






  • 1




    Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
    – DRF
    yesterday








11




11




Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
– clathratus
yesterday




Yes you could just define $$n{a_i}={na_i}$$
– clathratus
yesterday




13




13




You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
– fleablood
yesterday




You can certainly take a set of numbers $S= {1,4,10,7}$ and say "Hey, I'm going to multiply every element by $3$ and get the set ${3,12,20,21}$ and I'm going to call that set $3S$". And you can say "I'm going to refer to that as multiplying a set by a number, any objections? No? Good."
– fleablood
yesterday




5




5




I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
– freakish
yesterday






I'm not sure what is being asked here. You can most certainly do anything you want in maths (assuming logically valid). Are you asking about usefulness of this construction?
– freakish
yesterday






21




21




@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
– F.Carette
yesterday




@fleablood I do have an objection since $3 times 10 = 30$
– F.Carette
yesterday




1




1




Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
– DRF
yesterday




Hello and welcome to Math Stack exchange. What is your background? Where did you come across this notation or problem? Especially for a problem like this context is very important.
– DRF
yesterday










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















21














Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.






share|cite|improve this answer





























    7














    Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.






    share|cite|improve this answer





























      6














      In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:




      Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
      $$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$




      Your idea is a specific instance:




      Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
      $$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$




      The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.



      Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:




      If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.




      Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."



      Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)






      share|cite|improve this answer




























        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes








        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        21














        Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.






        share|cite|improve this answer


























          21














          Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer
























            21












            21








            21






            Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.






            share|cite|improve this answer












            Sure, we sometimes for example denote the set of even integers by $2Bbb Z={dots,-4,-2,0,2,4,dots}$, while the set of integers is $Bbb Z={dots,-2,-1,0,1,2,dots}$.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            John DoeJohn Doe

            10.9k11238




            10.9k11238























                7














                Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.






                share|cite|improve this answer


























                  7














                  Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.






                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                    7












                    7








                    7






                    Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    Yes..you have already defined the operation..a scalar multiplication on a set.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered yesterday









                    ershersh

                    24310




                    24310























                        6














                        In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:




                        Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
                        $$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$




                        Your idea is a specific instance:




                        Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
                        $$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$




                        The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.



                        Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:




                        If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.




                        Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."



                        Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)






                        share|cite|improve this answer


























                          6














                          In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:




                          Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
                          $$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$




                          Your idea is a specific instance:




                          Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
                          $$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$




                          The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.



                          Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:




                          If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.




                          Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."



                          Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)






                          share|cite|improve this answer
























                            6












                            6








                            6






                            In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:




                            Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
                            $$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$




                            Your idea is a specific instance:




                            Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
                            $$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$




                            The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.



                            Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:




                            If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.




                            Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."



                            Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)






                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            In fact, this is closely related to images of functions:




                            Let $f: A to B$ be a function between two sets and $A' subseteq A$, then we define
                            $$f[A'] := {f(a) | a in A'}quad left(= {b in B | exists a' in A'. f(a') = b}right)$$




                            Your idea is a specific instance:




                            Let $A' = {1, 4, 10, 7} subseteq mathbb{N} =: A$ and $f: mathbb{N} to mathbb{N}$ be the operation "multiply by three", then
                            $$f[A'] = {3, 12, 30, 21}$$




                            The other answer hints at the notation $NA'$, e.g. $3A'$.



                            Note that in general only $|A'| geq |f[A']|$ holds, e.g. consider $0mathbb{Z} = {0}$. However, with this "function framework", it is easy to state a criterion for when the equality holds:




                            If $f$ is injective on $A'$, then $|A'| = |f[A']|$.




                            Or in words: "If you map different elements in $A'$ to different elements in $B$, then certainly, we cannot lose elements due to duplicates in the set $f[A']$."



                            Can you see why $|2mathbb{Z}| = |mathbb{Z}|$? This proves "there are as many even numbers as integers". (Of course, you have to first define the cardinality function $|cdot|$ for arbitrary infinite sets first.)







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered yesterday









                            ComFreekComFreek

                            5321411




                            5321411















                                Popular posts from this blog

                                1300-talet

                                1300-talet

                                Display a custom attribute below product name in the front-end Magento 1.9.3.8