Find all equivalence classes. Questions about functions

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Caldus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Classes Equivalence
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of equivalence relations defined by a function on a set, specifically focusing on proving that a relation is an equivalence relation and finding equivalence classes based on a given function.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that reflexiveness is shown by demonstrating that for any x in A, f(x) = f(x), thus x ~ x.
  • Another participant clarifies that symmetry should be proven by assuming x ~ y and showing that this implies y ~ x.
  • A different participant points out that transitivity requires showing that if x ~ y and y ~ z, then x ~ z.
  • Concerns are raised about the incorrect use of "if (x,y) belong to A" in the proofs, with participants emphasizing that A contains elements, not ordered pairs.
  • One participant suggests using brute force to find equivalence classes by grouping elements based on the output of the function f.
  • Another participant questions the approach to defining equivalence classes, suggesting a possible misunderstanding of how to express them.
  • A participant explains that equivalence classes can be formed by partitioning A based on the outputs of f, clarifying that elements of the equivalence classes are numbers, not ordered pairs.
  • A later reply expresses gratitude for the clarification and presents a proposed quotient set of equivalence classes.
  • Another participant confirms the proposed quotient set as correct.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct formulation of the proofs for reflexiveness, symmetry, and transitivity. There is also some confusion regarding the definition of equivalence classes, but a consensus emerges around the method of partitioning based on the function's outputs.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations in the initial proofs, particularly regarding the use of terms and the structure of the equivalence relation. There is also an emphasis on ensuring that the equivalence classes are defined in terms of elements of A rather than ordered pairs from the function.

Caldus
Messages
106
Reaction score
0
Questions about functions:

Let A be a set and let f: A -> A be a function. For x,y belongs to A, define x ~ y if f(x) = f(y):

a. Prove that ~ is an equivalence relation on A.

This is my guess, but I am not sure whether I'm right:

Proving reflexiveness: If (x,y) belong to A, then f(x) = f(x), therefore, (x,y) ~ (x,y).

Proving symmetry: If (x,y) belong to A, then f(x) = f(y), therefore if (y,x) belong to A, then f(y) = f(x), so (x,y) ~ (y,x).

Proving transitivity: If (x,y) and (y,z) belong to A, then if f(x) = f(y) and f(y) = f(z), then f(x) = f(z). Therefore, (x,y) ~ (x,z).

Is this right?

b. Suppose A = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6} and f = {(1,2), (2,1), (3,1), (4,5), (5,6), (6,1)}. Find all equivalence classes.

I have no idea where to start with this one. Could someone start this one out? I would really appreciate it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Reflexivness is just proving that x ~ x, for any x in A. There shouldn't be any "y" term in your proof.

The way to prove symmetry is to assume x ~ y and show that this implies y ~ x (for any x,y in A).

Similarly, for transitivity you must show that for any x,y,z in A if x ~ y and y ~ z then x ~ z.


In all three of your proofs you seem to be using "if (x,y) belong to A" as a synonym for "if x,y in A and x ~ y". This is incorrect.


The easiest way to solve the second question is just by brute force. Group the elements of {1,2,3,4,5,6} by what the result of f(x) is. In other words, split the numbers up into a set where f(x)=1, a set where f(x)=2, and so on. These are your equivalence classes.
 
Wouldn't x,y be used in each one? Since a function is a cartesian product or whatever.
 
Yes, elements of a function can be considered as ordered pairs. However the equivalence relation is on the set A, which his not made up of ordered pairs. So you have to examine elements of A, not elements of the function f.
 
You start everyone with "If (x,y) belongs to A" which is incorrect.
A is the set containing x or y. If does not contain (x,y)!
 
The first one now reads:

Reflexive: If x belongs to A, then f(x) = f(x). Therefore, x ~ x.
Symmetry: If x ~ y, then f(x) = f(y). So f(y) = f(x) and y ~ x.
Transitive: If x ~ y and y ~ z, then f(x) = f(y) and f(y) = f(z). Then f(x) = f(z). Therefore, x ~ z.

And I still don't know what to do for the second part.
 
For the second part, could this be a possibility?:

Equivalence class of (1,2): {(x,y) | (x,y) belongs to (1,2)}
Equivalence class of (2,1): {(x,y) | (x,y) belongs to (2,1)}
(And so on...?)
 
Given a set and an equivalence relation, in this case A and ~, you can partition A into sets called equivalence classes. These equivalence classes have the special property that:

If x ~ y if and only if x and y are in the same equivalance class.


In this case, two elements are equivalent if f(x) = f(y). Thus all the elements with f(x) = 1 are in the same equivalence class, and all the elements with f(x) not= 1 are in different equivalence classes. Similarly, all the elements with f(x) = 2 are in the same equivalence class, and all the elements with f(x) = 3 are in the same equivalence class, and so on.


Note that in this case, we are still working with elements of A, not elements of f. Thus the elements of the equivalence classes with be numbers, not ordered pairs.
 
Thank you. That helped a lot.

My quotient set ends up being:

{{1}, {2,3,6}, {4}, {5}}

Is this right?
 
  • #10
Originally posted by Caldus
Thank you. That helped a lot.

My quotient set ends up being:

{{1}, {2,3,6}, {4}, {5}}

Is this right?

Yes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K