Equivalence Relation: Proving Properties on a Set S

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a relation \propto on a set S is an equivalence relation by demonstrating its reflexive, symmetric, and transitive properties. Participants explore the definitions and implications of these properties in the context of equivalence relations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definitions of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity, questioning how to derive symmetry from the given properties. Some express uncertainty about the implications of the statements provided in the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing hints and exploring different interpretations of the properties of equivalence relations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the order in which properties can be shown, and there is a recognition of the need to clarify the implications of the given conditions.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of potential confusion regarding the definitions of the properties and the specific statements given in the problem, particularly concerning the relationship between reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity.

gtfitzpatrick
Messages
372
Reaction score
0
let the relation \propto on a set S have the properties
(i) a \propto a for every a \in S
(II) if a \propto b and b \propto c then c \propto a

show that \propto is an equivalence relation on S.
Does every equivalence relation on S satisfy (i) and (ii)

I'm not sure where to start this i know
(i) is the reflexive property and (ii) is the Transitive property.
Im not sure where to go or how to tackle this,some pointers would be greatly appreciated
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Presumably you know what an equivalence relation is! (If not, this is an extremely difficult question!:smile:)

A relation, R, is an equivalence relation on a set if and only if it satisfies:
1) aRa for for all a in the set. (reflexive)
2) if aRb and bRc then aRc. (transitive)
3) if aRb then bRa. (symmetric)

You are given that this relation, \propto, is reflexive and symmetric so all you need to do is show that if (1) and (2) are true then (3) is true. Frankly, I see a problem with that. That, as stated, is NOT true. It should be easy for you to write down a relation on {a, b, c} that is both reflexive and transitive but not symmetric.
 
Actually, you aren't given that it is transitive. The statement in the question is that

aRb & bRc implies that cRa NOT that aRc.

It is straight forward to show, with a propitious choice of c, that this implies symmetry which then implies...
 
ah yes i see now, he threw that trick in and i didn't notice,thanks a million
 
so we need to show it holds true for the 3 properties refexive,symmetric and Transitive. We are given that it is reflexive. a \propto a it follows that b \propto b therefore from (ii) a \propto b and b\propto c and b \propto b we get a \propto c which implies it is Transitive but also since a \propto c and c \propto a which implies it is symmetric

?

every equivalence relation on S satisfies (i) and (ii) because in order for it to be an equivalence relation it has to satisfy the 3 properties of Reflexive,Symmetric and Transitive and if it holds true for these 3 properties it holds true for (i) and (ii)

?
 
Last edited:
You're given it is reflexive.

To show it's symmetric, you need to find a and b such that the given rules can be used to deduce that if a R b then b R a. *HINT*: a R a, and if a R b and b R c then c R a, so... what if b is a?

To show it's transitive then, well, you have to show that if a R b and b R c then a R c... but you already know c R a is true, right? And it's reflexive?

If you show reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity, then you're done. Nothing else is required... except, perhaps, to show it's a binary relation, but I think that's extraneous to the discussion.
 
gtfitzpatrick said:
We are given that it is reflexive. a \propto a it follows that b \propto b therefore from (ii) a \propto b and b\propto c and b \propto b we get a \propto c which implies it is Transitive but also since a \propto c and c \propto a which implies it is symmetric

Sorry, for this but is that not what I am showing aRa it follow bRb...etc but then i show its transitive and from there also symmetric. Do i need to show its symmetric first? Sorry if this is silly question and thanks for the help
 
No, you can show it in either order. I just happen to have seen it the other way around first. In theory, if you can show it one way and then the other, it doesn't matter which order you choose.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K