Proving irreflexive and symmetric relation

In summary, the conversation discusses how to prove whether a given relation, R, is an irreflexive symmetric relation over set A. The relation is defined as {(X, Y) | X ⊆ A ∧ Y ⊆ A ∧ ∀x ∈ X.∀y ∈ Y.(x, y) ∈ R}. The conversation also includes a discussion on a possible counterexample and how to approach the proof using symmetry and the definition of irreflexive.
  • #1
Aaron7
14
0

Homework Statement


I am on the final part of a question and I have to prove that the following is a irreflexive symmetric relation over A or if it is not then give a counter example.

R is given as an irreflexive symmetric relation over A.

Relation: {(X, Y) | X ⊆ A ∧ Y ⊆ A ∧ ∀x ∈ X.∀y ∈ Y.(x, y) ∈ R}

Homework Equations


See above.


The Attempt at a Solution


I have worked out the if X x Y ⊆ R then (X,Y) is put into the relation.
I worked out a simple example to see if it was worth trying to prove and it seems to be correct.
I am having trouble getting my head around trying to make a start to prove this.

Many thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Irreflexive means not reflexive, yes? Then a possible counter-example might exist when X and Y are not disjoint. Wouldn't it?
 
  • #3
I think your counterexample is incorrect.
R needs to be irreflexive, so if two sets have an element in common, R is not irreflexive and so the sets don't belong to the relation.
 
  • #4
Let's call your relation J.

To prove the symmetric part. Assume X J Y, this means
X ⊆ A ∧ Y ⊆ A ∧ ∀x ∈ X.∀y ∈ Y.(x, y) ∈ R and (X,Y) belongs to J
use the fact that R is symmetric to arrive at
Y ⊆ A ∧ X ⊆ A ∧ ∀y ∈ Y.∀x ∈ X.(y, x) ∈ R and (Y,X) belongs to J
which means Y J X

To prove the irreflexive part i would go for a contradiction. Since the statement you have to prove is a negative one. Which is: "for any set X, (X,X) does not belong to J". So assume the contrary and reach a contradiction.
 
  • #5
Thank you for the help. I think I was too worried about the complexity of the set rather than using the definition to simply prove it. I should be able to move on to some more complex ones now.

Thanks again.
 

1. What does it mean for a relation to be irreflexive?

For a relation to be irreflexive means that no element in the set is related to itself. In other words, there are no self-loops in the relation.

2. How do you prove that a relation is irreflexive?

To prove that a relation is irreflexive, we need to show that for every element a in the set, there does not exist a relation between a and itself. This can be done by using a proof by contradiction or by showing a counterexample.

3. What does it mean for a relation to be symmetric?

A relation is symmetric if for every pair of elements (a,b), if a is related to b, then b is also related to a. In other words, the order of the elements does not matter in a symmetric relation.

4. How do you prove that a relation is symmetric?

To prove that a relation is symmetric, we need to show that for every pair of elements (a,b), if a is related to b, then b is also related to a. This can be done by using a proof by contradiction or by showing a counterexample.

5. Can a relation be both irreflexive and symmetric?

Yes, a relation can be both irreflexive and symmetric. This means that there are no self-loops in the relation and the order of the elements does not matter. An example of such a relation is the "less than" relation on the set of real numbers.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
521
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
812
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
545
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
284
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
2K
Back
Top