Friday, 14 December 2012

Set Theory: Symmetric Relations



I was just trying to figure out this problem I came across. For a set
X={1,2,3,4,5} is it possible to come up with a relation on X that is symmetric, but neither reflexive nor transitive?



Also, it is possible to find a relation that is transitive, but neither reflexive nor symmetric?




Thank you!


Answer



In what follows I use aRb as an abbreviation for (a,b)R.



To attack problems like these, start with a small relation that satisfies the positive condition. For your second problem, for instance, you could begin by letting 1R2, 2R3, and 1R3; if you stop there, you have a transitive relation. Is it reflexive? Is it symmetric? Can you stop at this point?



Of course, you could have started simply with 1R1, which is also transitive, but it’s clearly symmetric, so that’s a bad idea. The same objection rules out starting with , the empty relation, in which nothing is related to anything: it’s also symmetric. The next simplest way to get transitivity is the one that I actually used.



The same approach works for your first problem and yields the answer suggested by JDH: starting with 1R1 isn’t very helpful, but starting with 1R2 and 2R1 works without further modification.


No comments:

Post a Comment

real analysis - How to find limhrightarrow0fracsin(ha)h

How to find lim without lhopital rule? I know when I use lhopital I easy get $$ \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}...