How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
The Cartesian product
Definition
Let and be sets. By If and then every ordered pair with and is an element of , so The Axiom Schema of Separation: for each formula , applied inside that set produces the Cartesian product
Its elements are exactly the ordered pairs (The Kuratowski ordered pair ) with and : no such pair is lost, because each such pair lies in the ambient set being separated. Thus holds if and only if for some and some .
Remarks
-
Why the ambient set is needed. "The set of all ordered pairs with first coordinate in and second in " is a class abbreviation, and no axiom turns a class abbreviation into a set on its own. The double power set is what supplies a set to separate inside, so the product costs The Axiom of Power Set: and The Axiom of Union: as well as Separation; The axiom ledger for this page: which of the ZFC axioms each construction and each result actually consumes keeps the account.
-
Products of nonempty sets. Whether a product of two nonempty sets is nonempty is settled here, by exhibiting the pair (, , , ; if and only if or ; and for nonempty and , if and only if and ). The corresponding question for a product of an arbitrary indexed family of nonempty sets is not settled by the axioms on this page: it is one formulation of the Axiom of Choice, stated at The Axiom of Choice ↗.
Depends on
- If $a \in A$ and $b \in B$ then $(a,b) \in \mathcal{P}(\mathcal{P}(A \cup B))$
- The Axiom Schema of Separation: for each formula $\varphi$, $\forall \bar p\,\forall x\,\exists y\,\forall z\,(z \in y \leftrightarrow (z \in x \wedge \varphi(z,\bar p)))$
- The Kuratowski ordered pair $(a,b) := \{\{a\},\{a,b\}\}$
- The power set $\mathcal{P}(x) = \{\, z : z \subseteq x \,\}$
- The union $\bigcup x$ of a set, and the binary union $a \cup b := \bigcup \{a,b\}$
Used by
- For a nonempty index set I: B ∩ ⋃_i ∈ I Aᵢ = ⋃_i ∈ I (B ∩ Aᵢ), B ∪ ⋂_i ∈ I Aᵢ = ⋂_i ∈ I (B ∪ Aᵢ), X ∖ ⋃_i ∈ I Aᵢ = ⋂_i ∈ I (X ∖ Aᵢ), and X ∖ ⋂_i ∈ I Aᵢ = ⋃_i ∈ I (X ∖ Aᵢ) Corollary
- For f : A → B with A ≠ ∅: f is injective if and only if there is g : B → A with g ∘ f = Δ_A; for A = ∅ the empty function is injective and has a left inverse if and only if B = ∅ Corollary
- A symmetric and transitive relation on a two-element set that is not reflexive on it Counterexample
- Relations R and S on a two-element set with S ∘ R ≠ R ∘ S Counterexample
- Sets A, B, C with (A × B) × C ≠ A × (B × C) Counterexample
- Sets with (A × C) ∪ (B × D) ⊊ (A ∪ B) × (C ∪ D) Counterexample
- A function is a relation f with (a,b) ∈ f and (a,c) ∈ f implying b = c; f : A → B, the value f(a), domain and codomain Definition
- Binary operation on a set; associativity, commutativity, and a subset closed under the operation Definition
- Equivalence relation, equivalence class, and the quotient set A/∼ Definition
- Reflexive, irreflexive, symmetric, asymmetric, antisymmetric, transitive, and connex relations on a set Definition
- Relation, dom R, ran R, fld R, and the specialisations "relation from A to B" and "relation on A" Definition
- The identity relation Δ_A = { (a,b) ∈ A × A : a = b } and the membership relation ∈_A = { (a,b) ∈ A × A : a ∈ b } Definition
- The ordered triple (a,b,c) := ((a,b),c) and the iterated products A × B × C := (A × B) × C Definition
- {∅} × {∅,{∅}} listed in full, together with the inclusion in P(P(A ∪ B)) that makes it a set Example
- ∅ is a relation on every set, is the unique equivalence relation on ∅, is a function ∅ → B for every B, is a bijection ∅ → ∅, and is not a surjection ∅ → {∅} Example
- A four-pair relation on {∅,{∅},{∅,{∅}}} with its domain, range, field, inverse, restriction, image and self-composite computed Example
- A two-cell partition of a three-element set, the equivalence relation it induces listed pair by pair, and the quotient set recovered from it Example
- For any indexed family the product ∏_i ∈ I P(Xᵢ) contains the constant function with value ∅, and ∏_i ∈ I {i} has exactly one element Example
- The distributive and exponential laws of sets are natural isomorphisms Example
- FALSE: a symmetric and transitive relation on a set A is reflexive on A, so reflexivity is redundant in the definition of an equivalence relation False statement
- FALSE: assuming ZF is consistent, ZF proves that every surjection f : A → B has a right inverse g : B → A with f ∘ g = Δ_B False statement
- Every relation R satisfies R ⊆ dom R × ran R, and R is a relation from A to B if and only if dom R ⊆ A and ran R ⊆ B Lemma
- For a function f : A → B the relation ker f := { (a,a') ∈ A × A : f(a) = f(a') } is an equivalence relation on A Lemma
- For I = {∅,{∅}} with A_∅ = A and A_{∅} = B, the map f ↦ (f(∅), f({∅})) is a bijection ∏_i ∈ I Aᵢ → A × B Lemma
- For relations R and S and a set A, the collections { (b,a) : (a,b) ∈ R }, { (a,c) : ∃ b ((a,b) ∈ R ∧ (b,c) ∈ S) } and { (a,b) ∈ R : a ∈ A } are sets Lemma
- For sets A and B the collection of all functions A → B is a set, being a subset of P(A × B) Lemma
- ∏_i ∈ ∅ Aᵢ = {∅}; if Aⱼ = ∅ for some j ∈ I then ∏_i ∈ I Aᵢ = ∅; and for I = {j} the evaluation f ↦ f(j) is a bijection ∏_i ∈ I Aᵢ → Aⱼ Proposition
- A × (B ∪ C) = (A × B) ∪ (A × C), A × (B ∩ C) = (A × B) ∩ (A × C), A × (B ∖ C) = (A × B) ∖ (A × C), (A ∩ B) × (C ∩ D) = (A × C) ∩ (B × D); A × B = ∅ if and only if A = ∅ or B = ∅; and for nonempty A and B, A × B ⊆ C × D if and only if A ⊆ C and B ⊆ D Proposition
- The axiom ledger for this page: which of the ZFC axioms each construction and each result actually consumes Remark
- Let ∼ be an equivalence relation on A with quotient map π : A → A/∼, and let f : A → B. There is a function g : A/∼ → B with g ∘ π = f if and only if a ∼ a' implies f(a) = f(a'); and such a g is then unique Theorem
- On a set A, R ↦ R ∖ Δ_A and S ↦ S ∪ Δ_A are mutually inverse bijections between the partial orders on A and the irreflexive, transitive relations on A; R ∖ Δ_A is the strict order of R, and every irreflexive transitive relation is asymmetric Theorem
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 16 results over 6 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Cartesian product (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- B. Kaya, MATH 320 Set Theory (METU), Def. 10 (standard reference, not scraped)
- C. Wilson, A Brief Introduction to ZFC (Chicago REU 2016), Def. 2.8 (standard reference, not scraped)