Relation on X: Symmetry, Reflexivity & Transitivity

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sam0617
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Symmetry
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the properties of relations defined on the set X = {a, b, c}. Two specific relations are analyzed: R1 = { (a,b), (b,a), (a,a), (b,c), (c,b) } is symmetric but neither reflexive nor transitive, while R2 = { (a,a), (a,b), (b,a), (b,b) } is both symmetric and transitive but not reflexive. The confusion arises from the misunderstanding of transitivity, which requires that for all x, y, z, if xRy and yRz, then xRz must hold universally, not just for some elements.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of set theory and relations
  • Familiarity with the concepts of symmetry, reflexivity, and transitivity
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical notation and logic
  • Ability to analyze and construct relations on finite sets
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of equivalence relations and their characteristics
  • Learn about partial orders and how they differ from equivalence relations
  • Explore examples of relations in different mathematical contexts, such as graphs and matrices
  • Investigate the implications of adding elements to a relation to achieve desired properties
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, educators teaching set theory, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of relations in discrete mathematics.

sam0617
Messages
18
Reaction score
1
Let X = { a, b, c }

X x X = { (a,a), (b,b), (c,c) }
{ (a,b), (b,a), (a,c), (c,a) }
{ (b,c), (c,b) }

1. Symmetric but not reflexive or transitive:
R = { (a,b), (b,a), (a,a), (b,c), (c,b) }
How come this is right? Isn't aRb, bRa imply aRa? isn't that transitive? is it because (b,c,), (c,b) is there but not (b,b) the reason why R is not transitive?

I ask because the 2nd question is confusing. Here it is:
2. Symmetric and transitive but not reflexive:
R= { (a,a), (a,b), (b,a), (b,b) }
See how aRb, bRa implies aRa so therefore it's transitive? How come it doesn't hold for the 1st question??

Thank you for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Transitive means that for ALL x,y,z:

xRy~\text{and}~yRz~\Rightarrow~xRz

It must holds for ALL.

For the first one, it isn't transitive since if you take x=z=a and y=x, then you see that the above is not satisfied. So it doesn't hold for ALL x,y,z. It does hold for some x,y,z. But it does hold for some. But some isn't enough to imply transitivity.

In (2), it does hold for ALL, so it is transitive.
 


micromass said:
Transitive means that for ALL x,y,z:

xRy~\text{and}~yRz~\Rightarrow~xRz

It must holds for ALL.

For the first one, it isn't transitive since if you take x=z=a and y=x, then you see that the above is not satisfied. So it doesn't hold for ALL x,y,z. It does hold for some x,y,z. But it does hold for some. But some isn't enough to imply transitivity.

In (2), it does hold for ALL, so it is transitive.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what the x=z=a and y=x then it wouldn't satisfy above.
Could you explain more?

EDIT: Then to make question 1 transitive, all I would have to add is (b,b) ?
 


Sorry, typo. I meant that if x=z=b and y=c, then it isn't true that bRc and cRb and bRb.

Adding (b,b) would not make it transtive.

Indeed, we also don't have

aRb and bRc => aRc

since (a,c) is not in the relation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K