Determine if the following is an equivalence relation

  • Thread starter polarbears
  • Start date
  • #1
23
0

Homework Statement


Determined if the following is an equivalence relation, if so describe the equivalence class.
The relationship [tex]C[/tex] on a group [tex]G[/tex], where [tex]aCb[/tex] iff [tex]ab=ba[/tex]


Homework Equations




The Attempt at a Solution


So i know there's 3 things to check: reflexive condition, symmetric condition, and the transitive condition.
The 1st two passed just by inspection, but I'm really stuck on the last one.
So if [tex]ab=ba[/tex] and [tex]bd=db[/tex] on a group [tex]G[/tex]does that imply [tex]ad=da[/tex]? That's how i set it up but I can't find how to (dis)prove it.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
35,132
6,878
I can't come up with any justification of why this statement wouldn't be true, but I'm not having any success, either. I'll keep gnawing on it for a while.
 
  • #3
lanedance
Homework Helper
3,304
2
with no general way to shift the order of a & d in a combined multiplication, i'm thinking a counter example may be the way to go, with the two element interchange operations of permutation groups a good place to start...
 
Last edited:
  • #4
23
0
Would this work?
Let a,b,d exist in a non-Abelian group and then let b be the identity element.
then ab=ba and bd=db just reduce to a=a and d=d but then ad does not have to equal da since the group is not Abelian
 
  • #5
lanedance
Homework Helper
3,304
2
yeah i think that is reasonable, i think the identity element always commutes, so is equivalent to everything, and in a non-abelian group there exist elements that don't commute, i'd just be a little clear with the difference between = vs ~ as well
 
  • #6
lanedance
Homework Helper
3,304
2
the counter example i was thinking of was the permutation group of 5 elements with
b = (12)
a = (34)
d = (45)

which works just as well with b = ()
 
Last edited:
  • #7
23
0
Old thread but I think I'm still not done with this problem

So I've establish that this is not an equivalence relationship in a non-abelian group, but it still works in an abelian group. So would the equivalence class be sets of elements in an Abelian group?

I'm still trying to grasp this idea of equivalence class
 
  • #8
vela
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
15,093
1,674
Yes, the equivalence class would be the entire group because all the elements commute with all the other elements and are therefore related.
 

Related Threads on Determine if the following is an equivalence relation

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
826
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
888
Replies
2
Views
532
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
Top