Set-Notation...?

volrokki

New member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
4
Okay, im not sure if this goes in this category so sorry if I'm wrong... I am taking a programming logic class and i can't figure these questions out at all... They're the only two on set notation we have and I have been looking all over the internet but the only things i can find are sites like http://www.purplemath.com/modules/setnotn.htm Which is really very useful, but my assignment isn't using numbers. My book is doing the same thing... I can't figure this out at all!!! It's 2:13 right now and I started this at about 10:30... im going a bit crazy... Please help if you can. I just dont understand how to do this at all!

2. (5 pt) Let the universe be {x | x is a employee}. S = {x | x is a salesperson} F = {x | x is in district 1} T = {x | x is in district 2} M = {x | x met his or her quota} B = {x | x received a bonus} Give a set-notation statement that indicates that "Not every salesperson in the second district met their quota."

3. (5 pt) Let the universe be {x | x is a employee}. S = {x | x is a salesperson} F = {x | x is in district 1} T = {x | x is in district 2} M = {x | x met his or her quota} B = {x | x received a bonus} Consider the statement "The salespersons in District 1 who met their quotas, together with those in District 2 who met their quotas, all received bonuses." Does this statement always refer to that same set as the statement "All salespersons who met their quotas received bonuses."? Why or why not?
 
volrokki said:
2. (5 pt) Let the universe be {x | x is a employee}. S = {x | x is a salesperson} F = {x | x is in district 1} T = {x | x is in district 2} M = {x | x met his or her quota} B = {x | x received a bonus} Give a set-notation statement that indicates that "Not every salesperson in the second district met their quota."
Create an expression for "(is a salesman) and (is in the second district)". Then do a complement with the set for "(met his quota)".

volrokki said:
3. (5 pt) Let the universe be {x | x is a employee}. S = {x | x is a salesperson} F = {x | x is in district 1} T = {x | x is in district 2} M = {x | x met his or her quota} B = {x | x received a bonus} Consider the statement "The salespersons in District 1 who met their quotas, together with those in District 2 who met their quotas, all received bonuses." Does this statement always refer to that same set as the statement "All salespersons who met their quotas received bonuses."? Why or why not?
Create an expression for "(is a salesman) and (is in District 1) and (met his quote)", and a similar one for District 2.

Create an expression for the union of these two sets.

Since these are part of "(received a bonus)", show subsethood.

Since we do not know if there are any other districts, we cannot say if the above is the same as "all who were salesmen and all who met their quotas". :wink:
 
You are AMAZING! That's why easier now! I actually think i KIND of understand it now. Thanks a LOT! :D
 
Okay, i thought i understood but i still dont get it... If anyone could actually show me id appreciate it... Ive been doing this for HOURS....
 
volrokki said:
2. (5 pt) Let the universe be {x | x is a employee}. S = {x | x is a salesperson} F = {x | x is in district 1} T = {x | x is in district 2} M = {x | x met his or her quota} B = {x | x received a bonus} Give a set-notation statement that indicates that "Not every salesperson in the second district met their quota."

You worked for HOURS? I'd assume you would have SOMETHING to show us, so that we'd know where your difficulties lie.

That said....

"Not every salesperson in the second district me their quota."

sounds to me like "there is at least ONE salesperson in the second district who did not meet the quota"

Or, there exists a salesperson (someone in S.....) who is in district 2 (is an element of T) but did NOT meet their quota ( is NOT in M)

So,

x E [ U AND S AND T AND ~M]


Sorry...I can't do all of the "set notation" symbols here, but I'm sure there is someone who can.
 
Top