What is a relation and how is it defined on a set?

Click For Summary
A relation R is defined on sets S and T if elements from S are included in the domain of R. A relation on a set S is a subset of the Cartesian product S x S, consisting of ordered pairs from S. It is not necessary for every element of S to be included in the relation; for instance, a relation can be defined only for odd integers within the set of all integers. If R is a relation on both S and T, the pairs must consist of elements from the intersection of S and T. Understanding these definitions clarifies how relations operate within specified sets.
icantadd
Messages
109
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


This is a seemingly subtle point here, that would actually clear up both of the two previous posts I have made. A relation R is said to be defined on S and T if s \in S and s \in dom(R).

Homework Equations


na


The Attempt at a Solution


Does this mean, that if I see a question that starts if R is defined on S ... that I can assume if I define a relation on S, call it T, that the domain of T must also be S. Or for any relation that we define on a set, it can be assumed that the domain of the relation is that set?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi icantadd! :smile:

Sorry, I'm not following any of that. :confused:

A relation on S is a subset of S x S.

From the PF Library page on relation …
A relation on a set A is a subset R of A \times A.
For a relation R \subseteq A\times A,~\text{and}~x, y \in A, we say xRy, i.e. x is related to y, if \left(x,y\right ) \in \mathbb{R}

:smile:
 
icantadd said:

Homework Statement


This is a seemingly subtle point here, that would actually clear up both of the two previous posts I have made. A relation R is said to be defined on S and T if s \in S and s \in dom(R).

Homework Equations


na


The Attempt at a Solution


Does this mean, that if I see a question that starts if R is defined on S ... that I can assume if I define a relation on S, call it T, that the domain of T must also be S. Or for any relation that we define on a set, it can be assumed that the domain of the relation is that set?
A relation on S is any subset of the cartesian product SxS, the set of ordered pairs of objects from S. It does not follow from that that every member of S must be in some ordered pair. For example, I could define R on Z, the set of integers by "xRy is x and y are both odd numbers" That would consist of things like (1, 1), (3, 5), (-3, 7), etc. That is also of course, a relation on "O", the set of odd integers. If R is a relation on both sets S and T, the members of the pairs of R must be contained in both S and T: some subset of the intersection of S and T.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
919
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K