Solve Equivalence Relation Homework: Prove ~ is Equivalent

In summary, the equivalence relation ~ is a reflexive, symmetric, and transitive relation. The symmetric part is easy to understand--turning the relation around and it will be the same: n + l = m + k vs m + k = n + l. But how do you prove the refexive and transitive part? I'm really confused by the ~ and do not quite understand why it appears both as the name of the relation and as an element of the relation itself. To prove reflexivity, you must check whether (x,y) ~ (x,y). By using the definition of ~ that you gave, can you check that (x,y) ~ (x,y)? To prove
  • #1
thenoob
2
0

Homework Statement


We define a relation ~ for N^2 by:

(n, m) ~(k, l) <=> n + l = m + k

Show that ~ is a equivalence relation


Homework Equations



A relation R on a set A is equivalent if R is:
reflexive if x R x for all x that is an element of A
symmetric if x R y implies y R x, for all x,y that is an element of A
transitive if x R y and y R z imply x R z, for all x,y,z that is an element of A

The Attempt at a Solution


I have to prove this by showing that the relation is reflexive, symmetric and transitive. The symmetric part i understand, the fact that we can turn the relation around and it will be the same: n + l = m + k vs m + k = n + l.

But how do I prove the refexive and transitive part? I am really confused by the ~ and do not quite understand why it appears both as the name of the relation and as an element of the relation itself.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
To prove reflexivity, you must check whether (x,y) ~ (x,y), i.e. whether any element a of [tex]N^2[/tex] satisfies a ~ a . By using the definition of ~ that you gave, can you check that (x,y) ~ (x,y)?

For transitivity, you must check whether (a,b) ~ (c,d) and (e,f) ~ (g,h) implies (a,b) ~ (g,h). Again, its just a matter of using the definition of ~.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
dx said:
To prove reflexivity, you must check whether (x,y) ~ (x,y), i.e. whether any element a of [tex]N^2[/tex] satisfies a ~ a . By using the definition of ~ that you gave, can you check that (x,y) ~ (x,y)?

You mean by writing (x, y) ~ (x, y) <=> x + y = x + y ?

dx said:
For transitivity, you must check whether (a,b) ~ (c,d) and (e,f) ~ (g,h) implies (a,b) ~ (g,h). Again, its just a matter of using the definition of ~.

I think my problem is that I get really confused by the ~ and what it means.
 
  • #4
~ is a relation, just like < or >. Just like you can check whether a < b, you can check whether (a,b) ~ (c,d) using the definition of ~ that you gave.
 
  • #5
Welcome to PF!

Hi thenoob! Welcome to PF! :smile:

Maybe this will help … :smile: (and maybe it won't! :redface:)

An equivalence relation separates N^2 into mutually exclusive sets.

Anything in one set ~ anything else in that set, but ~ nothing in any other set.

Everything is in exactly one set.

So how would you describe the set (the equivalence class) that (1,0) is in (if necessary, pick a few examples, and find a pattern)? :smile:
 

1. What is an equivalence relation?

An equivalence relation is a mathematical concept that defines a relationship between two elements in a set. It is a symmetric, reflexive, and transitive relation, meaning that it is a relationship that is true for any two elements in a set.

2. How do you prove that a relation is an equivalence relation?

To prove that a relation is an equivalence relation, you must show that it satisfies the three properties of an equivalence relation: symmetry, reflexivity, and transitivity. This can be done by showing that for any two elements in the set, the relation holds true for these properties.

3. What is the symbol for an equivalence relation?

The symbol for an equivalence relation is ≡ (equivalent to).

4. What is the purpose of proving that ~ is equivalent?

The purpose of proving that ~ is equivalent is to show that the relation satisfies the three properties of an equivalence relation: symmetry, reflexivity, and transitivity. This allows us to better understand the relationship between elements in a set and make logical conclusions based on this relationship.

5. Can you give an example of proving ~ is equivalent?

Yes, for example, if we have a set of numbers {1, 2, 3, 4} and define the relation ~ as "having the same remainder when divided by 2," we can prove that ~ is an equivalence relation. This can be done by showing that for any two numbers in the set, the relation holds true for the three properties of an equivalence relation: symmetry, reflexivity, and transitivity.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
813
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
687
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
923
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
4K
Back
Top