MHB Transitivity as property of relation

roni1
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
In Hebrew, one explain to me that:
"Transitivity is a property (or attribute - I don't which word is correct) of property".
So,
(1) Which word is correct?
(2) Why Transitivity is not standalone by itself?
(3) Are there relations of other kind, that no standalone by themselves?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
roni said:
(1) Which word is correct?
Either "property" or "attribute" can be used. These words are used in their usual sense from the dictionary, not in a technical sense. The second occurrence of "property", though, is probably used in a technical sense.

From the mathematical standpoint, a property, or predicate, on a set $A$ is any subset of $A$. Alternatively, a predicate on $A$ can be defined as a function from $A$ to the set {true, false}. The the subsets consists of those elements of $A$ that are mapped to true.

A binary relation on a set $A$ is any subset of $A\times A$, a Cartesian product of $A$ and $A$, which is a set of all ordered pairs of elements of $A$. Thus, a binary relation is a property of ordered pairs, or a predicate on $A\times A$. Binary relations can be transitive or not. Thus, "transitivity" is a property of a binary relation, i.e., something that can be true or not about this relation.

roni said:
(2) Why Transitivity is not standalone by itself?
Any adjective, like "transitive", requires a noun in mathematics just like in everyday language.

roni said:
(3) Are there relations of other kind, that no standalone by themselves?
An adjective "continuous" is a property of functions in calculus, so to talk about continuity you must apply it to some functions.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K