Understanding Equivalence Classes in Integer Sets

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of equivalence classes within the set of integers, specifically focusing on the equivalence relation defined by the condition that two integers are equivalent if their difference is an even integer. Participants explore the implications of this definition and the resulting equivalence classes, particularly cl(0) and cl(1).

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants attempt to clarify the definition of equivalence classes and question why cl(0) and cl(1) are the only distinctive classes. There is discussion about the nature of equivalence relations and how they relate to parity (evenness or oddness) of integers.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the definitions and properties of equivalence classes. Some participants provide insights into the relationship between integers and their equivalence classes, while others express confusion and seek further clarification on specific points, such as the disjoint nature of equivalence classes.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the equivalence classes should partition the set of integers and discuss the implications of this property. There is also mention of the need to understand the equivalence relation fully to determine the equivalence classes correctly.

annoymage
Messages
360
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Definition: If A is a set and if ~ is an equivalence relation on A, then the equivalence class of a\inA is the set {x\inA l a~x}. We write it as cl(a)Let S be the set of all integer. Given a,b \in S, define a~b if a-b is an even integer.

so, the equivalent class of a consist of all integer of the form a+2m, m are rational number.

and can someone explain why only cl(0) and cl(1) is the distinctive equivalence classes?

is cl(1) simply means {x\inA l 1~x}??
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
annoymage said:
so, the equivalent class of a consist of all integer of the form a+2m, m are rational number.

You mean, where m is an integer, I assume?

annoymage said:
and can someone explain why cl(0) and cl(1) is the distinctive equivalence classes?

Use the definition and calculate cl(0) and cl(1).
 
By the way, for any equivalence relation, x ~ y if and only if cl(x) = cl(y). Is 0 - 1 an even integer?
 
radou said:
You mean, where m is an integer, I assume?

yes, integer, :biggrin:
radou said:
Use the definition and calculate cl(0) and cl(1).

i still confused with what exactly is cl(0) or cl(1)

is cl(1)= {x\inS l 1~x}= 1+2m , m is integer??

if it is, why not cl(2)? because it's equivalent relation with "even number" too :confused:
 
Last edited:
Write down cl(2), slowly, using your definitions. Then write down cl(0). Is 0 ~ 2? In general, any two equivalence classes are either the same or they are disjoint. In your case, you have two equivalence classes (disjoint) whose union is the set of integers.
 
Given a an equivalence relation, ~, on a set S, the equivalence class, cl(a), is the set of all objects, x, in S such that x~ a. That is, it is the set of all things in S equivalent to a.

To find equivalence classes, first you need to understand the equivalence relation!

Here, the equivalence relation is "a~ b if and only if a-b is an even integer.

It shouldn't take too much to see that if a and b are "of the same parity" (either both even or both odd) then a- b is even:
If a and b are both even then we can write a= 2m, b= 2n so that a- b= 2m- 2n= 2(m-n) and so is even.
If a and b are both odd then we can write a= 2m+1, b= 2n+ 1 so that a- b= (2m+1)- (2n+1)= 2m- 2n= 2(m- n) which again is even.

If is only if one of a, b is even and the other odd that a and b are NOT even:
If a is even and b odd, then a= 2m and b= 2n+1 so a- b= 2m-(2n+1)= m- 2n- 1= 2(m-n)-1= 2(2m-n-1)+ 1 which is an odd number, not an even number. Similarly, if a is odd and b even, then a= 2m+1, b= 2n so a- b= (2m+1)- 2n= 2(m- n)+ 1, an odd number.

That is, odd numbers are equivalent to all other odd numbers and even numbers are equivalent to all other even numbers. The two equivalence classes are the set of all odd numbers and the set of all even numbers. 1 is in the first of those and 0 is in the second.
 
radou said:
Write down cl(2), slowly, using your definitions. Then write down cl(0). Is 0 ~ 2? In general, any two equivalence classes are either the same or they are disjoint. In your case, you have two equivalence classes (disjoint) whose union is the set of integers.

sorry but I'm still moving in circle, and still new with algebra

hmm, you kinda creating me more question than answer

ok, 1 by 1, :biggrin:

"In general, any two equivalence classes are either the same or they are disjoint"

let m be integer

cl(0)=2m={...,-2,0,2,...}
cl(2)=2+2m={...,0,4,6,..}

so this is not disjoint because 0 in the element of cl(0) and cl(2),
and they are not the same either??

thank you for enduring my whine :biggrin:
 
HallsofIvy said:
Given a an equivalence relation, ~, on a set S, the equivalence class, cl(a), is the set of all objects, x, in S such that x~ a. That is, it is the set of all things in S equivalent to a.

To find equivalence classes, first you need to understand the equivalence relation!

Here, the equivalence relation is "a~ b if and only if a-b is an even integer.

It shouldn't take too much to see that if a and b are "of the same parity" (either both even or both odd) then a- b is even:
If a and b are both even then we can write a= 2m, b= 2n so that a- b= 2m- 2n= 2(m-n) and so is even.
If a and b are both odd then we can write a= 2m+1, b= 2n+ 1 so that a- b= (2m+1)- (2n+1)= 2m- 2n= 2(m- n) which again is even.

If is only if one of a, b is even and the other odd that a and b are NOT even:
If a is even and b odd, then a= 2m and b= 2n+1 so a- b= 2m-(2n+1)= m- 2n- 1= 2(m-n)-1= 2(2m-n-1)+ 1 which is an odd number, not an even number. Similarly, if a is odd and b even, then a= 2m+1, b= 2n so a- b= (2m+1)- 2n= 2(m- n)+ 1, an odd number.

That is, odd numbers are equivalent to all other odd numbers and even numbers are equivalent to all other even numbers. The two equivalence classes are the set of all odd numbers and the set of all even numbers. 1 is in the first of those and 0 is in the second.

ok maybe i understand, try check my understanding with other question

the equivalence relation is "a~b if a-b is a multiple on n(n>1 be a fixed integer)"

so the equivalence class are set of x~a,

x-a=kn (k in integer) => x=a+kn

so the distinctive equivalence class are cl(0),cl(1),...,cl(n-1)

cl(n)=(k+1)n is simply the same set as cl(0)=kn, so it doesn't count.

suddenly i get all what radou was conveying.

anyway, correct me if i went wrong (time to sleep, see you tomorrow ;P)
 
Last edited:
annoymage said:
ok maybe i understand, try check my understanding with other question

the equivalence relation is "a~b if a-b is a multiple on n(n>1 be a fixed integer)"

so the equivalence class are set of x~a,

x-a=kn (k in integer) => x=a+kn

so the distinctive equivalence class are cl(0),cl(1),...,cl(n-1)

cl(n)=(k+1)n is simply the same set as cl(0)=kn, so it doesn't count.
Yes, and what you get are the "integer modulo n".

suddenly i get all what radou was conveying.

anyway, correct me if i went wrong (time to sleep, see you tomorrow ;P)

Earlier you said
let m be integer

cl(0)=2m={...,-2,0,2,...}
cl(2)=2+2m={...,0,4,6,..}

so this is not disjoint because 0 in the element of cl(0) and cl(2),
and they are not the same either??
No, that's impossible. One of important properties of "equivalence classes" on a set S is that they "partition" S- they divide S into sets such that every member of S is in one and only one such set. If two equivalence classes have any member in common, then they have all members in common- they are the same equivalence class (I am assuming, of course, equivalence classes under the same equivalence relation). That is true because if "a" is in equivalence class C1 and in C2, "b" is in C1, and "c" is in C2, then we have a~ b because they are both in C1, a~ c because they are in they are in C2 and so b= c by the "transitive property" of equivalence relations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
HallsofIvy said:
One of important properties of "equivalence classes" on a set S is that they "partition" S- they divide S into sets such that every member of S is in one and only one such set. If two equivalence classes have any member in common, then they have all members in common- they are the same equivalence class (I am assuming, of course, equivalence classes under the same equivalence relation). That is true because if "a" is in equivalence class C1 and in C2, "b" is in C1, and "c" is in C2, then we have a~ b because they are both in C1, a~ c because they are in they are in C2 and so b= c by the "transitive property" of equivalence relations.

you mean b~c right?
 
  • #11
Yes, HallsofIvy meant b ~ c (since a ~ b and a ~ c).
 
  • #12
Yes, thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K