I was reading this, question (shown in pic). But I didn't get, in (3) why they doesn't consider case of $|Q_i ∩ Q_j| = 9$ ?
Since, $Q_i ∩ Q_j ≤ Q_i$
$→ |Q_i ∩ Q_j| = 9$ is also valid case and if $|Q_i ∩ Q_j| = 9$ then what happens?
I was reading this, question (shown in pic). But I didn't get, in (3) why they doesn't consider case of $|Q_i ∩ Q_j| = 9$ ?
Since, $Q_i ∩ Q_j ≤ Q_i$
$→ |Q_i ∩ Q_j| = 9$ is also valid case and if $|Q_i ∩ Q_j| = 9$ then what happens?
Copyright © 2021 JogjaFile Inc.


If $|Q_i\cap Q_j|=9$, then $Q_i=Q_j$ (and so $i=j$), since $|Q_i|=|Q_j|=9$. Since the cases (a) and (b) in the argument are based on the intersections $Q_i\cap Q_j$ for $i\neq j$, this possibility is thus irrelevant.