MHB Is this transitive closure correct or not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Natalie1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    closure
Natalie1
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Attachments

  • discrete.gif
    discrete.gif
    2.1 KB · Views: 97
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you explain what you mean by the table and especially by the column next to it?
 
It is an Adjacency matrix, on the right side is a direct transitive closure. Explain to me why the first one is 0, second - 1, third - 2 etc. I don't understand this transitive closure.
 
Natalie said:
It is an Adjacency matrix, on the right side is a direct transitive closure.
Transitive closure of a relation is another relation. It can be represented by its own adjacency matrix, but I don't understand how it is represented by a column.
 
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...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top