>"a contains b" can mean b is an element of a or

thats why we have notation to avoid this nonsense

>>8859034
If you can't understand that sentence you either need English lessons or a new brain.

>>8859068
What sentence?

>>8859074
>"a contains b"

>>8859083
But its meaning is different depending on the context, that's the whole point. Are you saying it can't potentially be ambiguous?

What shit tier textbook are you using that even mistakes "contain" for "is an element of"? Every textbook I've seen uses it for subset.

>>8859034
>>8859064
>>8859068
>>8859074
>>8859083
>>8859085
>>8859086
What math class is this

>>8859092

Could be anything that uses elementary set theory. Discrete math, intro to real analysis, a proof class, logic and set theory, etc.

>>8859034
If "a" is an element of "b", wouldn't "a" still be a subset of "b"?

>>8859097
ty

>>8859086
Contemporary Abstract Algebra by Joseph A. Gallian. Specifically I found an example where he uses it both ways in the same sentence.
>Determine the smallest subring of Q that contains 1/2. (That is, find the subring S with the property that S contains 1/2 and, if T is any subring containing 1/2, then T contains S.)
It's not confusing in this case but fuck it, I just wanted to shitpost.

>Every textbook I've seen uses it for subset.
That's weird. If I had to choose one I'd say it makes more intuitive sense to say "{a,b} contains a" than "{a,b} contains {a}."

>>8859086
The interval [-1,1] contains 0. Are you stupid?

>>8859099
no, but {a} would be :^)

>>8859034
>a + b can mean addition in the field of reals, or addition in the integers depending on whether a and b are in Z or R
why is this allowed?

File: 1473655888216.jpg (47KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 604x453px

>>8859034
why are frogposters almost universally stupid?

File: 1482901668038.jpg (51KB, 700x772px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 700x772px

>>8859709
It's a self-perpetuating phenomenon. From the time Pepe got really popular (around 2014 I'd say) most frogposters were varying shades of retarded, probably a large part of them originated from /r9k/. The people that see this connection between stupidity and frogposting don't want to make themselves look dumb by posting frogs. The people that don't understand and turn into frogposters themselves are the ones that were idiots from the start.

>>8859703
THAT'S NOT THE SAME

>>8859709
>>8859729
TAKE YOUR PEDOPHILE CARTOONS BACK TO >>>/a/

>>8859709
Because they're almost universally from /pol/, and the few exceptions to that rule are from /r9k/, where the angry frog originated.

>>8859783
Not really. I hated pepe but like everything spammed by idiots I just got desensitized, but idiocy isn't exactly limited to any one board.

>>8859034

Assuming you're not trolling, there's a subtle difference, which one anon expressed good. It depends on the notation.

[eqn] B \subset A [/eqn]
or
[eqn] B \subseteq A [/eqn]

You should brush up on the strict definition of subset and proper subset to understand this.

>>8859918
I think you might be a bit confused.