The null set. It is a subset of every set.
Yes.
A null set is a set with nothing in it. A set containing a null set is still containing a "null set". Therefore it is right to say that the null set is not the same as a set containing only the null set.
No. Let A = {a} (a singleton set) then P(A) = {a, 0} where 0 is the null (empty) set.
The null set. Every set is a subset of itself and so the null set is a subset of the null set.
Yes. A null set is always a subset of any set. Also, any set is a subset of the [relevant] universal set.
The null set. It is a subset of every set.
null set ,universal set,cardinality set
Yes.
yes
A null set is a set with nothing in it. A set containing a null set is still containing a "null set". Therefore it is right to say that the null set is not the same as a set containing only the null set.
I was told once that the null set is the compliment to the universal set... I'm not convinced of this, however because the null set is a subset of the universal set as well. While I can't think of anything offhand that would prevent both of these statements from being true, it seems to me that they are contradictory statements.
No. Let A = {a} (a singleton set) then P(A) = {a, 0} where 0 is the null (empty) set.
The null set. Every set is a subset of itself and so the null set is a subset of the null set.
There is only one null set. It is 'the' null set. It is a set which does not contain any numbers.
The null set is a set which has no members. It is an empty set.
A null set is a set that contains no elements.