Proving Comparability of a Relation on the Plane (RxR): A Dilemma

  • Thread starter Thread starter sutupidmath
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Linear
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
6 replies · 2K views
sutupidmath
Messages
1,629
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


Define a relation on the plane by setting:

[tex](x_o,y_o)<(x_1,y_1) \mbox{ if either } y_0-x_0^2<y_1-x_1^2, \mbox{ or } y_o-x_o^2=y_1-x_1^2 \mbox{ and } x_0<x_1.[/tex]

I have easily showed that Nonreflexivity and Transitivity hold. The only dilemma i am facing is to show that Comparability holds as well.
That is to show that for any two elements
[tex](x_0,y_0),(x_1,y_1)\in R^2[/tex]
such that :
[tex](x_0,y_0)\not=(x_1,y_1)[/tex]

then either
[tex](x_0,y_0)<(x_1,y_1) \mbox{ or } (x_1,y_1)<(x_0,y_0)[/tex]

To be more specific, is proof by cases the only way to go about it, or is there any way around it? There seem to be too many cases, and i don't really want to pursue this route. I am also thinking about proving its contrapositive, but still, it looks like i would have to treat a few cases separately.

Any suggestions would be appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Too many cases?

How many do you think there are? And how involved is working through each one?

I haven't worked the problem, but my instinct says there shouldn't be much more than 4, and each one very quick. So nowhere near "too many".
 
Ok then, let:

[tex](x_o,y_o),(x_1,y_1)\in R^2, \mbox{ such that } (x_o,y_o)\not=(x_1,y_1).[/tex]

[tex]\mbox{ Then } x_o\not=x_1 \mbox { or } y_o\not=y_1.[/tex]

Without loss of generality(?) assume that

[tex]x_o<y_o \mbox{ or } y_o<y_1.----(1)[/tex]

Then we would have to consider the following cases:

[tex](i) x_o>0,x_1>0 \mbox{ or } y_o>0,y_1>0 .[/tex]

[tex](ii) x_0<0,x_1<0 \mbox{ or } y_o<0,y_1<0.[/tex]

[tex](iii) x_o<0,x_1>0 \mbox{ or } y_o<0,y_1>0.[/tex]

[tex](iv) x_o>0, x_1<0 \mbox{ or } y_o>0,y_1<0.[/tex]

First, can i make the assumption on (1), and second are these all the cases or?
 
Last edited:
It looks pretty straight forward to me. Assume that [itex](x_0,y_0)\ne (x_1,y_1)[/itex] and [itex](x_0, y_0) is not < (x1, y1)[/itex]. Then it is NOT the case that [itex]y_0- x_0^2< y_1- x_1^2[/itex] so either [itex]y_0- x_0^2> y_1- x_1^2[/itex] or [itex]y_0- x_0^2= y_1- x_1^2[/itex].
If the former, then [itex]y_1- x_1^2< y_0- x_0^2[/itex] so [itex](x_0, y_0)< (x_1, y_1)[/itex].

If the latter, then [itex]y_0- x_0^2= y_1- x_1^2[/itex] but [itex]x_0[/itex] is not less than [itex]x_1[/itex].

If [itex]x_0= x_1[/itex] then [itex]x_0^2= x_1^2[/itex] so from [itex]y_0- x_0^2= y_1- x_1^2[/itex] we get [itex]y_0= x_0[/itex] which contradicts [itex](x_0, y_0)\ne (x_1, y_1)[/itex].

If [itex]x_1< x0[/itex] then that, together with [itex]y_1- x_1^2= y_0- x_0^2[/itex] gives [itex](x_1,y_1)< (x_0,y_0)[/itex].

You still need to show that only one of those three can hold but that should be fairly easy.


We want to prove that, in that case, [itex](x_1, y_1)< (x_0, y_0)[/itex]. Then