Sorry, I am not sure what you are asking. Could you please clarify?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter XodoX
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relations
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around defining an equivalence relation based on a function and understanding the partition of sets under this relation. It includes theoretical aspects of functions, equivalence relations, and set equality, with a focus on preparing for an exam.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the equivalence relation ~f on A can be defined as x ~ y if f(x) = f(y), which is an equivalence relation on the domain of f.
  • Another participant discusses the equality of sets A and B, suggesting that two functions are equivalent if they have the same members, regardless of their orderings.
  • One participant raises a question about whether the sets A and B must be equal for the equivalence relation to hold, indicating that this could satisfy the first question but not necessarily the second.
  • There is mention of the necessity for both sets to have the same cardinality for a bijective mapping to exist, which is implied to be a condition for equivalence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty and differing interpretations regarding the definitions and implications of equivalence relations and set equality. No consensus is reached on how to approach the questions posed.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of the sets and functions involved, as well as the implications of their cardinalities and mappings.

XodoX
Messages
195
Reaction score
0
Trying to prepare for an exam...

4)
Let f : A -> B be any function from the set A to the set B. How is the equivalence relation ~f
on A defined?

5. Let f : R -> R, x -> x^2, (Couldn't find the R symbol - real numbers) be the parabola function. What does the partition for the equivalence relation of this function look like?

Does anybody know how I do this? I'm not understanding this at all!
Thank you in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The only one I can think of is x \sim y \iff f(x) = f(y) which is an equivalence on the domain of f.
 
XodoX said:
Trying to prepare for an exam...

4)
Let f : A -> B be any function from the set A to the set B. How is the equivalence relation ~f
on A defined?

5. Let f : R -> R, x -> x^2, (Couldn't find the R symbol - real numbers) be the parabola function. What does the partition for the equivalence relation of this function look like?

Does anybody know how I do this? I'm not understanding this at all!
Thank you in advance

If you're talking about sets, two sets (A,B) are equal if they have the same members. For any two functions; F(A),F(B) are equivalent if the equality A=B still holds. So two functions which impose different orderings on A and B are still equivalent if the two sets still have the same members.
 
Last edited:
pwsnafu said:
The only one I can think of is x \sim y \iff f(x) = f(y) which is an equivalence on the domain of f.

Thank.s No clue. It's a start. I'll try to do it with this one.



SW VandeCarr said:
If you're talking about sets, two sets (A,B) are equal if they have the same members. For any two functions; F(A),F(B) are equivalent if the equality A=B still holds. So two functions which impose different orderings on A and B are still equivalent if the two sets still have the same members.

Do you mean the first question?
 
XodoX said:
Do you mean the first question?

Yes. If two sets are equal, any partition function(s) on one or both set(s) will leave both sets with the same elements. If you're defining new sets, that's a different question. Does A=B? This would satisfy question one but not question two. If A is {2,3,4} and B is {4,9,16} they are not the same. However f(2)=4, f(3)=9, f(4)=16. f(2,3)=(4,9) etc. That is, the function holds for any partition of A onto B. Perhaps that's what they mean. In this case, both sets must have same cardinality so equivalence means a one to one mapping is possible and that it is bijective (an inverse function exists).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K