For some reason I am having a hard time dealing with partial order relations. The definition is what is killing me here. I have a digraph of a partial order relation and yet it does not appear to agree with the definition of partial order. I wish I could draw a picture of the digraph but since that would not work very well I will just do my best to explain it and why I think it is not a partial order.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

R is a relation on X={a,b,c,d,f}

Starting from the bottom I have

vertex a which is related to vertex b and vertex c

Then I have vertex b related to vertex d and c related to vertex d

then I have vertex d related to vertex d and vertex f

So correct me if I am wrong but if I were to write out R as a set of ordered pairs I would have

R={(a,b), (a,c), (b,d), (c,d), (d,f), (d,e)}

If that is correct then how can this be a partial order when the definition of partial order says a relation is partial order iff R is reflexive? That relation is not reflexive since (a,a) is not an element of R (the same is true for b,c,d,e,f).

Next problem I have is how to tell if one element is comparable to another. If someone could give me a good intuitive idea of how to tell if two elements of R is comparable I would greatly appericate it.

Regards

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Partial order relations

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**