What Does Equivalence Relations Mean in Set Theory?

kingstar
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm reading a book on sets and it mentions a set B = {1,2,3,4}
and it says that
R3 = {(x, y) : x ∈ B ∧y ∈ B}
What does that mean? Does that mean every possible combination in the set?

Also the book doesn't clarify this completely but for example using the set B say i had another set

R = {(1,2),(2,3),(1,3),(1,1),(2,2),(3,3),(4,4)},

Would this be clarified as transitive and reflexive? My question is does a set need to have all transitive properties and all the reflexive properties to be called transitive and reflexive.

If i had another set:

R1 = {(1,2),(2,3),(1,3),(1,1),(2,2),(3,3)}

In which i removed (4,4) would this set R1 still be considered reflexive?

Thanks in advance
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Your first example is a transitive and reflexive relation. A relation is transitive and reflexive if it satisfies the axioms for transitivity and reflexivity.

Your other example is not reflexive, since 4 is an element of X, but 4 ~ 4 is not satisfied.
 
My question is does a set need to have all transitive properties and all the reflexive properties to be called transitive and reflexive.
You appear to have the wrong idea about the "transitive" and "reflexive" properties. You cannot talk about "all the transitive properties" and "all the reflexive properties" because there is only one of each. We apply the term "reflexive" to the whole relation, not individual pairs. If we have a relation on set A, then it is a subset of AxA, the set of all ordered pairs with each member from set A. Such a relation is called "reflexive" if and only if, for every a in A, (a, a) is in the relation. If a particular such pair, say, (x, x), is in the relation, we do NOT call that pair "a reflexive property". Similarly, a relation is called "transitive" if and only if whenever pairs (a, b) and (b, c) are in the relation, so is (a, c). We do NOT apply the term "transitive" to the individual pairs.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Ahh, thanks! This helped me understand it a lot better
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top