Equivalence Relations: Explaining $I_A$, $\rho^{-1}$ and $\rho \circ \rho$

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Equivalence Relation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the properties of equivalence relations, specifically addressing the conditions $I_A \subset \rho$, $\rho^{-1} = \rho$, and $\rho \circ \rho \subset \rho$. These conditions correspond to reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity, respectively. An example using the relation $m \mathrel{\rho} n \iff m \le n$ on natural numbers illustrates that while $\langle 3,5\rangle \in \rho$, the inverse relation $\rho^{-1}$ does not satisfy symmetry, as $\langle 5,3\rangle \notin \rho$. This confirms that $\rho$ is not an equivalence relation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of equivalence relations in mathematics
  • Familiarity with reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity properties
  • Basic knowledge of set theory and relations
  • Experience with natural numbers and ordering relations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the formal definition of equivalence relations in mathematical literature
  • Explore examples of equivalence relations and non-equivalence relations
  • Learn about the implications of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity in different contexts
  • Investigate the role of inverse relations in set theory
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, particularly those studying abstract algebra or discrete mathematics, as well as educators seeking to explain the properties of equivalence relations.

evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hi again! (Smile)

If $\rho$ is an equivalence relation, could you explain me why the following relations stand? (Thinking)

  • $I_A \subset \rho$
  • $\rho^{-1}=\rho$
  • $\rho \circ \rho \subset \rho$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These three conditions correspond to reflexivity, symmetry and transitivity, respectively. Again, I would recommend taking some concrete relations (ideally, those where these properties hold and where they don't) and determine whether the properties you listed hold. This will help build intuition.

For example, let $m\mathrel{\rho}n\iff m\le n$ on natural numbers. Then $\langle 3,5\rangle\in\rho$, but $\rho^{-1}\ni\langle 5,3\rangle\notin\rho$; therefore, $\rho^{-1}\not\subseteq\rho$. The same fact is expressed by saying that $3\le 5$, but $5\not\le 3$. Both these statements mean that $\rho$ is not symmetric. Note, by the way, that $\rho^{-1}\subseteq\rho$ is equivalent to $\rho^{-1}=\rho$ for any $\rho$ because $\rho^{-1}\subseteq\rho$ implies that $(\rho^{-1})^{-1}\subseteq\rho^{-1}$, i.e., $\rho\subseteq\rho^{-1}$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K