Bourbaki

Definition 1

Tag 03I1, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 03I1].

Theory of Sets, chapter II, § 4. Union and intersection of a family of sets

Let (Xι)ι∈I(\mathrm{X}_\iota)_{\iota \in \mathrm{I}} be a family of sets (resp. a family of subsets of a set E). The set Ex((∃ι)(ι∈I\mathscr{E}_x((\exists \iota)(\iota \in \mathrm{I} and x∈Xι))x \in \mathrm{X}_\iota)), that is to say, the set of all xx which belong to at least one set of the family (Xl)l∈I(X_l)_{l\in I}, is called the union of the family, and is denoted by

⋃l∈IXl,\bigcup_{l\in I}X_l,
[^1]

If (Xl)l∈I(X_l)_{l\in I} is a family of subsets of a set EE, then its union is a subset of EE; notice that it does not depend on EE, nor on the target G\mathfrak{G} of the mapping l→Xll\to X_l.

It is clear that if I=∅I=\varnothing, we have ⋃l∈IXl=∅\displaystyle\bigcup_{l\in I}X_l=\varnothing, because the relation (∃l)(l∈I and x∈Xl)(\exists l)(l\in I\text{ and }x\in X_l) is then false.

¶ Suppose now that I≠∅I\neq\varnothing. If α\alpha is an element of II, the relation

(∀l)((l∈I)⟹(x∈Xl)) (\forall l)((l\in I)\Longrightarrow(x\in X_l))
implies x∈Xαx\in X_\alpha and therefore, by virtue of C52 (§1, no. 6), this relation is collectivizing in xx.

Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.

Cited by

Nothing.

Cites

Transcribed from the printed edition, 2004, Springer. Not translated.