MHB Binary Relations and Equivalence Classes | Proving R is an Equivalence Relation

  • Thread starter Thread starter JProgrammer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Binary Relations
JProgrammer
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
So the question I am trying to solve is this:

Define a binary relation R on R as follows: R={(x,y)∈ R×R:cos⁡(x)=cos⁡(y)}
Prove that R is an equivalence relation, and determine its equivalence classes.

I've figured out the first two requirements for being a binary relation:

1. cos(x) = cos(x)
2. cos(x) = cos(x + 2kpi)

I don't know how to go about solving the third requirement for being a binary relation because there is no z to work with.
If someone could show me how to find the third requirement, that would be great.

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JProgrammer said:
So the question I am trying to solve is this:

Define a binary relation R on R as follows: R={(x,y)∈ R×R:cos⁡(x)=cos⁡(y)}
Prove that R is an equivalence relation, and determine its equivalence classes.

I've figured out the first two requirements for being a binary relation:

1. cos(x) = cos(x)
2. cos(x) = cos(x + 2kpi)

I don't know how to go about solving the third requirement for being a binary relation because there is no z to work with.
If someone could show me how to find the third requirement, that would be great.

Thank you

Hi JProgrammer! Welcome to MHB! ;)

From wiki, an equivalence relation requires:

For all a, b and c in X:
1. a ~ a. (Reflexivity)
2. a ~ b if and only if b ~ a. (Symmetry)
3. if a ~ b and b ~ c then a ~ c. (Transitivity)

The equivalence class of a under ~, denoted [a], is defined as $[a]=\{b\in X\mid a\sim b\}$.​

You have shown the first, since indeed for any $x$ we have $\cos x = \cos x$.
Can you show 2 and 3, and can you find the equivalence classes?
 
You have shown the first said:
I don't understand what you mean. For the symmetric requirement, I have shown it as: cos(x) = cos(x + 2kx). As for the transitive requirement, that is what I need help with. I don't know what that would be since there is no z to work with.

Also, I don't know how to find the equivalence classes.
 
JProgrammer said:
I don't understand what you mean. For the symmetric requirement, I have shown it as: cos(x) = cos(x + 2kx). As for the transitive requirement, that is what I need help with. I don't know what that would be since there is no z to work with.

Also, I don't know how to find the equivalence classes.

Ah, but that is not symmetry.
For symmetry we need that for all $x,y$ we have that $xRy$ if and only if $yRx$.
That means that for all $x,y$ we need that $\cos x = \cos y$ if and only if $\cos y = \cos x$.
This is trivially true. It follows from how the equal sign ($=$) is defined, which is also an equivalence relation.

For transitivity we need that for all $x,y,z$ we have that if $\cos x = \cos y$ and $\cos y=\cos z$, that we also have that $\cos x = \cos z$.
Again, this is trivially true.

That leaves the equivalence classes.
You have found that $x$ is equivalent to $x+2k\pi$, since $\cos(x) = \cos(x+2k\pi)$.
So that might suggest that $[x]=\{x+2k\pi \mid k\in \mathbb Z\}$.
But how about $-x$? Don't we have that $\cos(x)=\cos(-x)$?
That would imply that $-x$ should also be in the equivalence class $[x]$. (Worried)
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Back
Top