There is no such concept as "proper set". Perhaps you mean "proper subset"; a set "A" is a "proper subset" of another set "B" if:
proper set is a common that we ask
An empty set is not a proper subset of an empty set.An empty set is not a proper subset of an empty set.An empty set is not a proper subset of an empty set.An empty set is not a proper subset of an empty set.
NO- by definition a set is not a proper subset of itself . ( It is a subset, but not a proper one. )
No. The null set cannot have a proper subset. For any other set, the null set will be a proper subset. There will also be other proper subsets.
It isn't. The empty set is a subset - but not a proper subset - of the empty set.
yes, if the set being described is empty, we can talk about proper and improper subsets. there are no proper subsets of the empty set. the only subset of the empty set is the empty set itself. to be a proper subset, the subset must be strictly contained. so the empty set is an improper subset of itself, but it is a proper subset of every other set.
The empty set.
A set with only one element in it. The only proper subset of such a set is the null set.
The null set is a proper subset of any non-empty set.
The set of proper factors doesn't include 1 and the number itself.
NO
It is a set that is well defined.