Sets, Intersections and Unions, and semantics

I always thought it was kind of counterintuitive in set theory, statistics etc., that boolean ORs produce larger result sets than boolean ANDs in general. In early math you get used to thinking that AND is like addition, i.e. if you have x AND y you would get a larger amount than either x OR y alone, that’s the nature of addition. But when dealing with sets of course the wording is kind of reversed: with booleans, x OR Y (union) will produce larger result sets than x AND y (intersection) most of the time–the chances are smaller of having both x AND y than x OR y. Stuff I’ll have to think about more if I study more math!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: