Set (mathematics)

A set is the mathematical model for a collection of

different[1] things;[2][3][4] a set contains elements or
members, which can be mathematical objects of
any kind: numbers, symbols, points in space, lines,
other geometrical shapes, variables, or even other
sets.[5] 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 they have precisely the
same elements.[6]
A set of polygons in an Euler diagram

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.[5]

History
The concept of a set emerged in mathematics at
the end of the 19th century.[7] The German word for
set, Menge, was coined by Bernard Bolzano in his
work Paradoxes of the Infinite.[8][9][10]

Passage with a translation of the original set definition of Georg Cantor. The German word Menge for set is translated with aggregate here.
Georg Cantor, one of the founders of set theory,
gave the following definition at the beginning of his
Beiträge zur Begründung der transfiniten
Mengenlehre:[1]

A set is a gathering together into a

whole of definite, distinct objects of our
perception or our thought—which are
called elements of the set.

Bertrand Russell called a set a class:[11]

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 in that case is the class.

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 an
element of B, and every element of B is an element
of A; this property is called the extensionality of
sets.[12]

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., {x | x is a set
and x ∉ x}, 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.

Axiomatic set theory

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.[13] 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.

How sets are defined and set

notation
Mathematical texts commonly denote sets by
capital letters[14][5] in italic, such as A, B, C.[15] A set
may also be called a collection or family, especially
when its elements are themselves sets.

Roster notation

Roster or enumeration notation defines a set by

listing its elements between curly brackets,
separated by commas:[16][17][18][19]
 A = {4, 2, 1, 3}
B = {blue, white, red}.

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, {2, 4, 6} and
{4, 6, 4, 2} represent the same set.[20][15][21]

For sets with many elements, especially those

following an implicit pattern, the list of members
can be abbreviated using an ellipsis '...'.[22][23] For
instance, the set of the first thousand positive
integers may be specified in roster notation as

{1, 2, 3, ..., 1000}.

Infinite sets in roster notation

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

{0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ...},

and the set of all integers is

{..., −3, −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, 3, ...}.

Semantic definition

Another way to define a set is to use a rule to

determine what the elements are:

Let A be the set whose members are the

first four positive integers.
 Let B be the set of colors of the French flag.

Such a definition is called a semantic

description.[24][25]

Set-builder notation

Set-builder notation specifies a set as a selection

from a larger set, determined by a condition on the
elements.[25][26][27] For example, a set F can be
defined as follows:

In this notation, the vertical bar "|" means "such

that", and the description can be interpreted as "F
is the set of all numbers n such that n is an integer
in the range from 0 to 19 inclusive". Some authors
use a colon ":" instead of the vertical bar.[28]
Classifying methods of definition

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.[25] 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.

Membership
If B is a set and x is an element of B, this is written
in shorthand as x ∈ B, which can also be read as
"x belongs to B", or "x is in B".[12] The statement "y is
not an element of B" is written as y ∉ B, which can
also be read as "y is not in B".[29][30]

For example, with respect to the sets

A = {1, 2, 3, 4}, B = {blue, white, red}, and
F = {n | n is an integer, and 0 ≤ n ≤ 19},

4∈ A and 12 ∈ F; and
20 ∉ F and green ∉ B.

The empty set

The empty set (or null set) is the unique set that has
no members. It is denoted ∅ or or { }[31][32] or
ϕ[33] (or ϕ).[34]

Singleton sets
A singleton set is a set with exactly one element;
such a set may also be called a unit set.[6] Any such
set can be written as {x}, where x is the element.
The set {x} and the element x mean different
things; Halmos[35] draws the analogy that a box
containing a hat is not the same as the hat.

Subsets
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,[36] or B ⊇ A.[37] 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.[26]

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),[38][29] while others
reserve A ⊂ B and B ⊃ A for cases where A is a
proper subset of B.[36]

Examples:

The set of all humans is a proper subset of the

set of all mammals.
{1, 3} ⊂ {1, 2, 3, 4}.
{1, 2, 3, 4} ⊆ {1, 2, 3, 4}.

The empty set is a subset of every set,[31] and every

set is a subset of itself:[38]

∅ ⊆ A.
A ⊆ A.
Euler and Venn diagrams

A is a subset of B.
B is a superset of 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 A is a subset of B, then the region representing A
is completely inside the region representing B. If
two sets have no elements in common, the regions
do not overlap.

A Venn diagram, in contrast, is a graphical

representation of n sets in which the n loops divide
the plane into 2n zones such that for each way of
selecting some of the n 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 A, B, and C, there should be
a zone for the elements that are inside A and C and
outside B (even if such elements do not exist).

Special sets of numbers in

mathematics

The natural numbers are contained in the integers , which are contained in the rational numbers , which are contained in the real numbers ,
which are contained in the complex numbers

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. ) or
blackboard bold (e.g. ) typeface.[39] These include

or , the set of all natural numbers:

(often, authors exclude
0);[39]
or , the set of all integers (whether positive,
negative or zero):
;[39]
or , the set of all rational numbers (that is,
the set of all proper and improper fractions):

. For example,

− 74 ∈ Q and 5 = 51 ∈ Q; [39]
 or , the set of all real numbers, including all
rational numbers and all irrational numbers
(which include algebraic numbers such as
that cannot be rewritten as fractions, as well as
transcendental numbers such as π and e);[39]
or , the set of all complex numbers:
C = {a + bi | a, b ∈ R}, for example,
1 + 2i ∈ C. [39]

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

injective (or one-to-one) if it maps any two

different elements of A to different elements of
B,
surjective (or onto) if for every element of B,
there is at least one element of A 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 A is paired with a unique
 element of B, and each element of B is paired
with a unique element of A, 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.

Cardinality
The cardinality of a set S, denoted | S |, is the
number of members of S.[40] For example, if
B = {blue, white, red}, then | B | = 3. Repeated
members in roster notation are not counted,[41][42]
so | {blue, white, red, blue, white} | = 3, 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.[43]

Infinite sets and infinite cardinality

The list of elements of some sets is endless, or

infinite. For example, the set of natural numbers
is infinite.[26] In fact, all the special sets of numbers
mentioned in the section above are infinite. Infinite
sets have infinite cardinality.

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.[44] Sets with cardinality less than or equal
to that of are called countable sets; these are
either finite sets or countably infinite sets (sets of
the same cardinality as ); some authors use
"countable" to mean "countably infinite". Sets with
cardinality strictly greater than that of are called
uncountable sets.

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.[45]

The 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.[46] 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.[47] (ZFC is the
most widely-studied version of axiomatic set
theory.)

Power sets
The power set of a set S is the set of all subsets of
S.[26] The empty set and S itself are elements of the
power set of S, because these are both subsets of
S. For example, the power set of {1, 2, 3} is
{∅, {1}, {2}, {3}, {1, 2}, {1, 3}, {2, 3}, {1, 2, 3}}.
The power set of a set S is commonly written as
P(S) or 2S.[26][48][15]

If S has n elements, then P(S) has 2n elements.[49]

For example, {1, 2, 3} has three elements, and its
power set has 23 = 8 elements, as shown above.

If S is infinite (whether countable or uncountable),

then P(S) 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 S with the elements of P(S) will leave some
elements of P(S) unpaired. (There is never a
bijection from S onto P(S).)[50]

Partitions
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.[51][52]

Basic operations
 The complement of A in U

Suppose that a universal set U (a set containing all

elements being discussed) has been fixed, and that
A is a subset of U.

The complement of A is the set of all elements

(of U) that do not belong to A. It may be denoted
Ac or A′. In set-builder notation,
. The complement may
also be called the absolute complement to
distinguish it from the relative complement
below. Example: If the universal set is taken to be
the set of integers, then the complement of the
set of even integers is the set of odd integers.
 The union of A and B, denoted A ∪B

The intersection of A and B, denoted A ∩ B

The set difference A \ B

The symmetric difference of A and B

Given any two sets A and B,

 their union A ∪ B is the set of all things that are
members of A or B or both.
their intersection A ∩ B is the set of all things
that are members of both A and B. If A ∩ B = ∅,
then A and B are said to be disjoint.
the set difference A \ B (also written A − B) is the
set of all things that belong to A but not B.
Especially when B is a subset of A, it is also
called the relative complement of B in A.
their symmetric difference A Δ B is the set of all
things that belong to A or B but not both. One
has .
their cartesian product A × B is the set of all
ordered pairs (a,b) such that a is an element of A
and b is an element of B.

Examples:

{1, 2, 3} ∪ {3, 4, 5} = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}.

 {1, 2, 3} ∩ {3, 4, 5} = {3}.
{1, 2, 3} − {3, 4, 5} = {1, 2}.
{1, 2, 3} Δ {3, 4, 5} = {1, 2, 4, 5}.
{a, b} × {1, 2, 3} = {(a,1), (a,2), (a,3), (b,1), (b,2), (b,3)
}.

The operations above satisfy many identities. For

example, one of De Morgan's laws states that
(A ∪ B)′ = A′ ∩ B′ (that is, the elements outside
the union of A and B are the elements that are
outside A and outside B).

The cardinality of A × B is the product of the

cardinalities of A and B. (This is an elementary fact
when A and B are finite. When one or both are
infinite, multiplication of cardinal numbers is
defined to make this true.)
The power set of any set becomes a Boolean ring
with symmetric difference as the addition of the
ring and intersection as the multiplication of the
ring.

Applications
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 A to a codomain B is a subset of the
Cartesian product A × B. For example, considering
the set S = {rock, paper, scissors} of shapes in the
game of the same name, the relation "beats" from S
to S is the set
B = {(scissors,paper), (paper,rock), (rock,scissors)}
; thus x beats y in the game if the pair (x,y) is a
member of B. Another example is the set F of all
pairs (x, x2), where x is real. This relation is a
subset of R × R, because the set of all squares is
subset of the set of all real numbers. Since for
every x in R, one and only one pair (x,...) is found in
F, it is called a function. In functional notation, this
relation can be written as F(x) = x2.

Principle of inclusion and exclusion

The inclusion-exclusion principle for two finite sets states that the size of their union is the sum of the sizes of the sets minus the size of their
intersection.

The inclusion–exclusion principle is a technique for

counting the elements in a union of two finite sets
in terms of the sizes of the two sets and their
intersection. It can be expressed symbolically as

A more general form of the principle gives the

cardinality of any finite union of finite sets:

See also
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

Notes
1. Cantor, Georg; Jourdain, Philip E.B. (Translator)
(1895). "beiträge zur begründung der transfiniten
Mengenlehre" (https://web.archive.org/web/2011061
0133240/http://brinkmann-du.de/mathe/fos/fos01_0
3.htm) [contributions to the founding of the theory of
transfinite numbers]. Mathematische Annalen (in
German). New York Dover Publications (1954 English
translation). xlvi, xlix: 481–512, 207–246. Archived
from the original (http://brinkmann-du.de/mathe/fos/
 fos01_03.htm) on 2011-06-10. "By an aggregate
(Menge) we are to understand any collection into a
whole (Zusammenfassung zu einem Gansen) M of
definite and separate objects m (p.85)"

2. P. K. Jain; Khalil Ahmad; Om P. Ahuja (1995).

Functional Analysis (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=yZ68h97pnAkC&pg=PA1) . New Age
International. p. 1. ISBN 978-81-224-0801-0.

3. Samuel Goldberg (1 January 1986). Probability: An

Introduction (https://books.google.com/books?id=C
mzFx9rB_FcC&pg=PA2) . Courier Corporation. p. 2.
ISBN 978-0-486-65252-8.

4. Thomas H. Cormen; Charles E Leiserson; Ronald L

Rivest; Clifford Stein (2001). Introduction To
Algorithms (https://books.google.com/books?id=NLn
gYyWFl_YC&pg=PA1070) . MIT Press. p. 1070.
ISBN 978-0-262-03293-3.

5. Halmos 1960, p. 1 (https://archive.org/details/naives

ettheory00halm/page/n11/mode/2up) .
6. Stoll, Robert (1974). Sets, Logic and Axiomatic
Theories (https://archive.org/details/setslogicaxioma
t0000stol) . W. H. Freeman and Company. pp. 5 (http
s://archive.org/details/setslogicaxiomat0000stol/pag
e/5) . ISBN 9780716704577.

7. José Ferreirós (16 August 2007). Labyrinth of

Thought: A History of Set Theory and Its Role in
Modern Mathematics (https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=TXRBwwEACAAJ) . Birkhäuser Basel.
ISBN 978-3-7643-8349-7.

8. Steve Russ (9 December 2004). The Mathematical

Works of Bernard Bolzano (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=zp7cLQn0x3gC&pg=PR28) . OUP
Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-151370-1.

9. William Ewald; William Bragg Ewald (1996). From

Kant to Hilbert Volume 1: A Source Book in the
Foundations of Mathematics (https://books.google.c
om/books?id=rykSDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA249) . OUP
Oxford. p. 249. ISBN 978-0-19-850535-8.
10. Paul Rusnock; Jan Sebestík (25 April 2019). Bernard
Bolzano: His Life and Work (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=-hqJDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA430) . OUP
Oxford. p. 430. ISBN 978-0-19-255683-7.

11. Bertrand Russell (1903) The Principles of

Mathematics, chapter VI: Classes

12. Halmos 1960, p. 2 (https://archive.org/details/naives

ettheory00halm/page/2/mode/2up) .

13. Jose Ferreiros (1 November 2001). Labyrinth of

Thought: A History of Set Theory and Its Role in
Modern Mathematics (https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=DITy0nsYQQoC) . Springer Science & Business
Media. ISBN 978-3-7643-5749-8.

14. Seymor Lipschutz; Marc Lipson (22 June 1997).

Schaum's Outline of Discrete Mathematics (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=6A5g3RiYiBUC&pg=PA1) .
McGraw Hill Professional. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-07-
136841-4.
15. "Introduction to Sets" (https://www.mathsisfun.com/
sets/sets-introduction.html) . www.mathsisfun.com.
Retrieved 2020-08-19.

16. Charles Roberts (24 June 2009). Introduction to

Mathematical Proofs: A Transition (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=NjBLnLyE4jAC&pg=PA45) . CRC
Press. p. 45. ISBN 978-1-4200-6956-3.

17. David Johnson; David B. Johnson; Thomas A. Mowry

(June 2004). Finite Mathematics: Practical
Applications (Docutech Version) (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=ZQAqzxLFXhoC&pg=PA220) . W. H.
Freeman. p. 220. ISBN 978-0-7167-6297-3.

18. Ignacio Bello; Anton Kaul; Jack R. Britton (29 January

2013). Topics in Contemporary Mathematics (https://
books.google.com/books?id=d8Se_8DWTQ4C&pg=P
A47) . Cengage Learning. p. 47. ISBN 978-1-133-
10742-2.
19. Susanna S. Epp (4 August 2010). Discrete
Mathematics with Applications (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=PPc_2qUhXrAC&pg=PA13) .
Cengage Learning. p. 13. ISBN 978-0-495-39132-6.

20. Stephen B. Maurer; Anthony Ralston (21 January

2005). Discrete Algorithmic Mathematics (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=_0vNBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA1
1) . CRC Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-1-4398-6375-6.

21. D. Van Dalen; H. C. Doets; H. De Swart (9 May 2014).

Sets: Naïve, Axiomatic and Applied: A Basic
Compendium with Exercises for Use in Set Theory for
Non Logicians, Working and Teaching
Mathematicians and Students (https://books.google.
com/books?id=PfbiBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA1) . Elsevier
Science. p. 1. ISBN 978-1-4831-5039-0.

22. Alfred Basta; Stephan DeLong; Nadine Basta (1

January 2013). Mathematics for Information
Technology (https://books.google.com/books?id=VU
YLAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA3) . Cengage Learning. p. 3.
ISBN 978-1-285-60843-3.
23. Laura Bracken; Ed Miller (15 February 2013).
Elementary Algebra (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=nFkrl_kDiTAC&pg=PA36) . Cengage Learning.
p. 36. ISBN 978-0-618-95134-5.

24. Halmos 1960, p. 4 (https://archive.org/details/naives

ettheory00halm/page/4/mode/2up) .

25. Frank Ruda (6 October 2011). Hegel's Rabble: An

Investigation into Hegel's Philosophy of Right (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=VV0SBwAAQBAJ&p
g=PA151) . Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 151. ISBN 978-
1-4411-7413-0.

26. John F. Lucas (1990). Introduction to Abstract

Mathematics (https://books.google.com/books?id=jk
lsb5JUgoQC&pg=PA108) . Rowman & Littlefield.
p. 108. ISBN 978-0-912675-73-2.

27. Weisstein, Eric W. "Set" (https://mathworld.wolfram.c

om/Set.html) . mathworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved
2020-08-19.
28. Ralph C. Steinlage (1987). College Algebra (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=lcg3gY3444IC) . West
Publishing Company. ISBN 978-0-314-29531-6.

29. Marek Capinski; Peter E. Kopp (2004). Measure,

Integral and Probability (https://books.google.com/b
ooks?id=jdnGYuh58YUC&pg=PA2) . Springer Science
& Business Media. p. 2. ISBN 978-1-85233-781-0.

30. "Set Symbols" (https://www.mathsisfun.com/sets/sy

mbols.html) . www.mathsisfun.com. Retrieved
2020-08-19.

31. Halmos 1960, p. 8 (https://archive.org/details/naives

ettheory00halm/page/8/mode/2up) .

32. K.T. Leung; Doris Lai-chue Chen (1 July 1992).

Elementary Set Theory, Part I/II (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=cdmy2eOhJdkC&pg=PA27) . Hong
Kong University Press. p. 27. ISBN 978-962-209-026-
2.
33. Aggarwal, M.L. (2021). "1. Sets". Understanding ISC
Mathematics Class XI. Vol. 1. Arya Publications
(Avichal Publishing Company). p. A=3.

34. Sourendra Nath, De (January 2015). "Unit-1 Sets and

Functions: 1. Set Theory". Chhaya Ganit (Ekadash
Shreni). Scholar Books Pvt. Ltd. p. 5.

35. Halmos 1960, Sect.2 (https://archive.org/details/naiv

esettheory00halm/page/4/mode/2up) .

36. Felix Hausdorff (2005). Set Theory (https://books.goo

gle.com/books?id=yvVIdH16k0YC&pg=PA30) .
American Mathematical Soc. p. 30. ISBN 978-0-8218-
3835-8.

37. Peter Comninos (6 April 2010). Mathematical and

Computer Programming Techniques for Computer
Graphics (https://books.google.com/books?id=Kdb7-
YnnOVwC&pg=PA7) . Springer Science & Business
Media. p. 7. ISBN 978-1-84628-292-8.

38. Halmos 1960, p. 3 (https://archive.org/details/naives

ettheory00halm/page/2/mode/2up) .
39. George Tourlakis (13 February 2003). Lectures in
Logic and Set Theory: Volume 2, Set Theory (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=nparMXao59QC&pg=PA
137) . Cambridge University Press. p. 137. ISBN 978-
1-139-43943-5.

40. Yiannis N. Moschovakis (1994). Notes on Set Theory

(https://books.google.com/books?id=ndx0_6VCypc
C) . Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 978-3-
540-94180-4.

41. Arthur Charles Fleck (2001). Formal Models of

Computation: The Ultimate Limits of Computing (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=c42oYf4zBzMC&pg
=PA3) . World Scientific. p. 3. ISBN 978-981-02-4500-
9.

42. William Johnston (25 September 2015). The

Lebesgue Integral for Undergraduates (https://books.
google.com/books?id=v4ueCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA7) .
The Mathematical Association of America. p. 7.
ISBN 978-1-939512-07-9.
43. Karl J. Smith (7 January 2008). Mathematics: Its
Power and Utility (https://books.google.com/books?i
d=-0x2JszrkooC&pg=PA401) . Cengage Learning.
p. 401. ISBN 978-0-495-38913-2.

44. John Stillwell (16 October 2013). The Real Numbers:

An Introduction to Set Theory and Analysis (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=VPe8BAAAQBAJ) .
Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 978-3-319-
01577-4.

45. David Tall (11 April 2006). Advanced Mathematical

Thinking (https://books.google.com/books?id=czKqB
gAAQBAJ&pg=PA212) . Springer Science & Business
Media. p. 211. ISBN 978-0-306-47203-9.

46. Cantor, Georg (1878). "Ein Beitrag zur

Mannigfaltigkeitslehre" (http://www.digizeitschriften.
de/dms/img/?PPN=PPN243919689_0084&DMDID=d
mdlog15) . Journal für die Reine und Angewandte
Mathematik. 1878 (84): 242–258.
doi:10.1515/crll.1878.84.242 (https://doi.org/10.151
5%2Fcrll.1878.84.242) .
47. Cohen, Paul J. (December 15, 1963). "The
Independence of the Continuum Hypothesis" (https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC221287) .
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of
the United States of America. 50 (6): 1143–1148.
Bibcode:1963PNAS...50.1143C (https://ui.adsabs.har
vard.edu/abs/1963PNAS...50.1143C) .
doi:10.1073/pnas.50.6.1143 (https://doi.org/10.107
3%2Fpnas.50.6.1143) . JSTOR 71858 (https://www.js
tor.org/stable/71858) . PMC 221287 (https://www.nc
bi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC221287) .
PMID 16578557 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16
578557) .

48. Halmos 1960, p. 19 (https://archive.org/details/naive

settheory00halm/page/18/mode/2up) .

49. Halmos 1960, p. 20 (https://archive.org/details/naive

settheory00halm/page/20/mode/2up) .
50. Edward B. Burger; Michael Starbird (18 August 2004).
The Heart of Mathematics: An invitation to effective
thinking (https://books.google.com/books?id=M-qK8
anbZmwC&pg=PA183) . Springer Science & Business
Media. p. 183. ISBN 978-1-931914-41-3.

51. Toufik Mansour (27 July 2012). Combinatorics of Set

Partitions (https://books.google.com/books?id=5Nvr
H4w8WGsC) . CRC Press. ISBN 978-1-4398-6333-6.

52. Halmos 1960, p. 28 (https://archive.org/details/naive

settheory00halm/page/28/mode/2up) .

References
Dauben, Joseph W. (1979). Georg Cantor: His
Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite (http
s://archive.org/details/georgcantorhisma0000da
ub) . Boston: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-
691-02447-2.
Halmos, Paul R. (1960). Naive Set Theory (http
s://archive.org/details/naivesettheory00halm) .
 Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand. ISBN 0-387-
90092-6.
Stoll, Robert R. (1979). Set Theory and Logic.
Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications. ISBN 0-486-
63829-4.
Velleman, Daniel (2006). How To Prove It: A
Structured Approach. Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 0-521-67599-5.

External links
The dictionary definition of set at Wiktionary
Cantor's "Beiträge zur Begründung der
transfiniten Mengenlehre" (in German) (https://g
dz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/download/pdf/PPN235
181684_0046/LOG_0044.pdf)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?

title=Set_(mathematics)&oldid=1148629587"
This page was last edited on 7 April 2023, at 10:35 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise
noted.