Union
Given two sets A , B X , then the union of A and B is defined as the set A B := { p X : p A p B }
Intersection
Given two sets A , B X , then the intersection of A and B is defined as the set A B := { p X : p A p B }
A set Intersects Another
Suppose that A , B are sets, we say that A intersects B when A B
Arbitrary Union
Suppose that M is a family of sets, then M is defined so that x M A M , x A
Arbitrary Intersection
Suppose that M is a family of sets, then M is defined so that x M A M , x A
Arbitrary Union Element of Notation
We define A M A := M
Arbitrary Intersection Element of Notation
We define A M A := M
Arbitrary Union Indexed Notation
Suppose that I is an index set for the collection A = { A α : α I } where A α is a set, then α I A α := A . If the index set is known by context, then we may use the shorthand α A α
Arbitrary Intersection Indexed Notation
Suppose that I is an index set for the collection A = { A α : α I } where A α is a set, then α I A α := A . If the index set is known by context, then we may use the shorthand α A α
Arbitrary Union Counting Notation
Suppose that a , b Z , with a < b , and A := { A i : i Z , a i b } , then i = a b A i = A
Arbitrary Intersection Counting Notation
Suppose that a , b Z , with a < b , and A := { A i : i Z , a i b } , then i = a b A i = A
disjoint sets
Given two sets A , B we say that A and B are disjoint when A B =
pairwise disjoint sets
Suppose that M is a family of sets, then we say these sets are pairwise disjoint when given A , B M such that A B , then A B =
partition
Suppose that X is a set, then we say that a set P is a partition of X if and only if the following are true
partition of the integers
The family { { p Z : p < 0 } , { 0 } , { p Z : p > 0 } } is a partition of Z

Note that the integers 1 , 0 , 1 show that the empty set is not in this family. We'll now prove that it's union equals Z , so let p P , therefore p is in at least one of the sets included in P , since each is a subset of Z , then we know p Z , for the reverse direction, we can assume that p Z , therefore we know that p is either positive, negative or zero, so that p P , this shows P = Z .

To show this family is pairwise disjoint, note that 0 { p Z : p < 0 } and 0 { p Z : p > 0 } , which shows us that { 0 } { p Z : p < 0 } = and { 0 } { p Z : p > 0 } = .

Given any positive integer, we know it cannot be a negative integer, therefore { p Z : p < 0 } { p Z : p > 0 } = , thus we know that P is pairwise disjoint, which concludes the proof.

a set intersected with a superset is itself
Let A , B be sets such that A B , then A B = A

We start by showing A B A , so consider x A B , so we know that x A and x B , therefore we trivially know that x A , as needed

Now consider the other direction, we need to show that A A B , so consider that x A , then we want to show that x A and x B , which really just simplifies to showing x B , but we know that A B , therefore since x A , we know that x B finishing the proof

A Set Union a Subset is Itself
Let A , B be sets such that B A , then A B = A

We start by showing A B A , so consider x A B , so we know that x A or x B , if x A we are done, on the other hand if x B , then since B A , then x A as needed.

Supposing that x A , then we know that x A B is true.

Subset of an Intersection
Suppose that A , B , C are sets then A ( B C ) iff A B and A C

Suppose that A ( B C ) , suppose x A , therefore x B and x C showing A B and A C

Now suppose that A B and A C , therefore given x A , we can see that x B C as needed.

intersection factors from union
Suppose that U α is an indexed family of sets, and Y is any set, then
α I ( U α Y ) = ( α I U α ) Y

Suppose that x α I ( U α Y ) , therefore there is some β I such that x U β Y , so that x U β and x Y . Since there is some β I such that x U β then x α I U α , additionally we had that x Y so that x ( α I U α ) Y as needed

Now suppose that x ( α I U α ) Y , therefore x ( α I U α ) and x Y , due to this we have some β I , such that x U β and thus x U β Y which by definition shows that x α I ( U α Y )

intersection factors from intersection
Suppose that U α is an indexed family of sets, and Y is any set, then
α I ( U α Y ) = ( α I U α ) Y

Suppose that x α I ( U α Y ) , therefore for every α I we have: x U α Y , so that x U α and x Y . Since it's true for every α I then x α I U α , additionally we had that x Y so that x ( α I U α ) Y as needed

Now suppose that x ( α I U α ) Y , therefore x ( α I U α ) and x Y , due to this, for every α I , we know x U α and thus x U α Y which by definition shows that x α I ( U α Y )

Union of Subsets is Still a Subset
Suppose that C is a collection of subsets of X , then C X
Let x C C C , then x U for some U C , since U must be a subset of X then x is also in X . As needed
An Intersection of Supersets is still a Superset
Suppose that C is a collection of supersets of X , then C X
Let x X , suppose that C C , thus by definition C X , and since x X we must deduce x C , therefore x C as needed.
Intersection Decreases as It Intersects More Things
Suppose that N , M are families of sets such that N M , then M N
Let x M , then for every S M , x S . Now consider any K N , then K M therefore x K which shows that x N as needed.
A set Covered in Subsets is a Union
Suppose A is a set and that for each a A , there is a B a such that a B a A , then A = a A B a

We can see that C = { B a : a A } is a collection of subsets of A , so since a union of a subsets is still a subset we have a A B a A .

But also given p A we know that p B p so p a A B a which shows A a A B a , so we can conclude A = a A B a .