If you click on link above, it will take you to a screen shot.
in the mutually exclusive sets video => is used as part of the notation towards the end of the video to say that the complement of A is not equal to B but that B => 13 which is a part of the A complement and 13 which is not a part of the B set.
Couple of things,
- can we use <> to represent not equal to rather than equals which has been crossed through
- why are we saying that the complement of A is less than or equal (=>) to 13 which is a part of the A complement and 13 which is not a part of the B set.
It doesn’t read right to me and the narrator of the video doesn’t reference it as part of the explanation?
Could you elaborate / explain for me please?
We’re using the crossed out equal sign (=\=) because it clearly depicts “not equal” and we don’t think “<>” is as universally recognized to have that meaning.
As for the “=>” sign, we’re using it not in the sense of “greater than or equal to”, but as an implication. This means it’s equivalent to “therefore”.