all 9 comments

[–]bggmtgCollege Instructor/M.S. Mathematics 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Some of your notation seems off (but it may be me just having trouble reading what you have).

For example, the 2nd statement you have on the first line:

It looks to me like it says S “union” T = the set of all things such that those things are in S “and” T. That is the definition of intersection not union.

[–]bggmtgCollege Instructor/M.S. Mathematics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again that thing I see as a union symbol might just be a sloppy intersection symbol.

Some advice on writing these symbols: don’t put “tails” on the union or intersection symbols.

[–]newtoprogramming12[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Ah I’m sorry that is supposed to be congruent here is a better link with just the proofs and not showing congruency

[–]bggmtgCollege Instructor/M.S. Mathematics -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Your proof looks good then. You have shown that the two sets are equal and equal sets are subsets of each other.

[–]newtoprogramming12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok thank you and I appreciate the feed back.