- #1
Kamataat
- 137
- 0
I answered this wrong on a test, but now I've come up with a different solution.
Problem: Prove that a relation [itex]xRy\Leftrightarrow x-y\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex] defined on [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex] is an equivalence relation.
Solution:
1.) Reflexivity: [itex]xRx,\forall x\in\mathbb{R}[/itex]
For every [itex]x[/itex] we have [itex]x-x=0[/itex] which is an integer, so reflexivity holds.
2.) Symmetricity: [itex]xRy\Rightarrow yRx,\forall x,y\in\mathbb{R}[/itex]
If for all [itex]x,y\in\mathbb{R}[/itex] we have [itex](x-y)\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex], then [itex]y-x=-1\cdot(x-y)[/itex] (any integer multiplied by -1 is also an integer) and thus [itex](y-x)\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex] and the relation is symmetric.
3.) Transitivity: [itex]xRy\wedge yRz\Rightarrow xRz,\forall x,y,z\in\mathbb{R}[/itex]
For some [itex]x,y,z\in\mathbb{R}[/itex] we have [itex](x-y)+(y-z)=x-y+y-z=x-z[/itex] (the sum of two integers is also an integer) and thus [itex](x-z)\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex]. The relation is also transitive.
Is this it?
PS: sorry for the poor spelling
- Kamataat
Problem: Prove that a relation [itex]xRy\Leftrightarrow x-y\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex] defined on [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex] is an equivalence relation.
Solution:
1.) Reflexivity: [itex]xRx,\forall x\in\mathbb{R}[/itex]
For every [itex]x[/itex] we have [itex]x-x=0[/itex] which is an integer, so reflexivity holds.
2.) Symmetricity: [itex]xRy\Rightarrow yRx,\forall x,y\in\mathbb{R}[/itex]
If for all [itex]x,y\in\mathbb{R}[/itex] we have [itex](x-y)\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex], then [itex]y-x=-1\cdot(x-y)[/itex] (any integer multiplied by -1 is also an integer) and thus [itex](y-x)\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex] and the relation is symmetric.
3.) Transitivity: [itex]xRy\wedge yRz\Rightarrow xRz,\forall x,y,z\in\mathbb{R}[/itex]
For some [itex]x,y,z\in\mathbb{R}[/itex] we have [itex](x-y)+(y-z)=x-y+y-z=x-z[/itex] (the sum of two integers is also an integer) and thus [itex](x-z)\in\mathbb{Z}[/itex]. The relation is also transitive.
Is this it?
PS: sorry for the poor spelling
- Kamataat