Undergrad An equivalence relation is a partition of A?

Click For Summary
An equivalence relation on a set X is defined by three properties: reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity. Equivalence classes, which group elements related by the equivalence relation, are subsets of X, not X × X. The union of all equivalence classes indeed partitions the set X, meaning every element belongs to exactly one class. The confusion arises from misunderstanding the relationship between equivalence classes and Cartesian products. Ultimately, the equivalence classes do not form a partition of X × X, but rather partition the original set X.
rashida564
Messages
220
Reaction score
7
TL;DR
equivalent class is a Cartesian product
Hi equivalent class is a Cartesian product of A*A. Then shouldn't it's union be a partition of A*A, instead being a partition of A
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This question doesn't really make sense. Can you try to rephrase it?

Given a (non-empty) set ##X##, an equivalence relation ##R## is a subset ##R \subseteq X \times X## such that

(1) ##(x,x) \in R## for all ##x \in X##
(2) For all ##x,y \in X: (x,y) \in R \implies (y,x) \in R##
(3) For all ##x,y,z \in X: (x,y) \in R, (y,z) \in R \implies (x,z) \in R##

An equivalence class of an element ##x\in X## is then the set of all elements that are in relation with ##x##, i.e. the set ##[x]:=\{y \in X: (x,y) \in R\}##.

It is true though that ##X = \bigcup_{x \in X} [x]## and that every element of ##X## is in precisely one equivalence class. Thus the equivalence classes partition the set ##X##.
 
  • Like
Likes sysprog
Shouldn't their union be X*X where * is the Cartesian product. Think about it this way you have sets of element of (a1,a2). How can you union them and then they give you elements of (a), R is a subsets of X*X, take the union of all the partitions you should get X*X not the set X
 
rashida564 said:
Shouldn't their union be X*X where * is the Cartesian product. Think about it this way you have sets of element of (a1,a2). How can you union them and then they give you elements of (a)

No, the equivalence classes are subsets of ##X##. Recall that the equivalence class of ##x## is the subset ##\{y \in X: (x,y) \in R\} \subseteq X##. This is a subset of ##X## (by definition!), not of ##X \times X##. Thus any union of such sets remains in ##X##.
 
From my university textbook
 

Attachments

  • Capture.PNG
    Capture.PNG
    6.7 KB · Views: 264
rashida564 said:
From my university textbook

Yes, this is true. But I say that the union of the equivalence classes partition ##X##. Just look carefully at the definitions I wrote down.
 
Math_QED said:
No, the equivalence classes are subsets of ##X##.
But they aren't they are subset of X*X
 
rashida564 said:
But they aren't they are subset of X*X

What is the definition of equivalence class?
 
Equivalence classes now I see thx
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K