Help with an Equivalence Relation?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter katye333
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Equivalence Relation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The equivalence relation defined by aRb if and only if |a| = |b| on the set of real numbers ℝ is confirmed to be an equivalence relation. It is reflexive, as |a| = |a| holds true for all a in ℝ. The discussion also highlights a general theorem stating that a relation R defined by a total function f: A → B is an equivalence relation if it satisfies the condition a1Ra2 if and only if f(a1) = f(a2). Examples of functions that can be used include the absolute value function and the sign function.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of equivalence relations in mathematics
  • Familiarity with absolute value functions
  • Knowledge of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity properties
  • Basic concepts of set theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of equivalence relations in depth
  • Explore the implications of the absolute value function in various mathematical contexts
  • Learn about total functions and their role in defining equivalence relations
  • Investigate examples of non-equivalence relations and the properties that fail
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding equivalence relations and their applications in set theory and functions.

katye333
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hello all, I have an equivalence relation that I need some help with. Normally I find these to be fairly simple, however I'm not sure if I'm over-thinking this one or if it's just tricky.

For the relation: aRb $\Longleftrightarrow$ |a| = |b| on $\mathbb{R}$ determine whether it is an equivalence relation.

Reflexive: Would it really be reflexive? If a = -2, then wouldn't |a| = +2?

Or would it be reflexive, since all a's are contained in a?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
katye333 said:
Reflexive: Would it really be reflexive? If a = -2, then wouldn't |a| = +2?
Or would it be reflexive, since all a's are contained in a?

A relation $R$ is reflexive on a set $S$ if and only if $aRa$ for all $a\in S$. In our case $|a|=|a|$ for all $a\in \mathbb{R}$ i.e. $aRa$ for all $a\in \mathbb{R}$, which implies that $R$ is reflexive on $\mathbb{R}$.
 
You can prove a general theorem. Let $A$, $B$ be sets and $f:A\to B$ a total function. Let a relation $R$ on $A$ be defined by $a_1Ra_2\iff f(a_1)=f(a_2)$. Then $R$ is an equivalence relation. In this case $f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ is the absolute value function. You can also apply this theorem to $f(x)=\mathop{\text{sgn}}(x)=\begin{cases}1&x>0\\ 0&x=0\\ -1&x<0\end{cases}$, $f(x)=\lfloor x\rfloor$, etc.

Note also that if we take not a function $f$, but an arbitrary relation $F\subseteq A\times B$ and define \[a_1Ra_2\iff \text{there exists a }b\in B\text{ such that }a_1Fb\text{ and }a_2Fb\] then the statement does not hold in general. (Which property of an equivalence relation gets violated?) For example, it does not hold if $A=B$ is a set of people and $aFb\iff b$ is a friend $a$.
 
Thank you both for the responses.
I don't know why that one confused me, while none of the others did. :p
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K