Asked by Laurey

Which of these relations on {0, 1, 2, 3} are equivalence relations? Justify the relation(s) that are not equivalent.

R1: {(0,0), (1,1), (2,2), (3,3)}
R2: {(0,0), (1,1), (1,3), (2,2), (2,3), (3,1), (3,2), (3,3)}
R3: {(0,0), (0,1), (0,2), (1,0), (1,1), (1,2), (2,0), (2,2), (3,3)}

R1: This relations is equivalent
R2: This relation is equivalent
R3: This relation is not equivalent because:
• It is reflexive because the relation does contains (0,0), (1,1), (2,2), and (3,3).
• It is not symmetric because the relation contains (1,2), but not (2,1).
•This relation is transitive.

I think something is not right. . .Any suggestions? Thanks for any helpful replies!

Answers

Answered by Laurey
I think I may have found the problem in my thinking:

R2 is not equivalent right? Because it is not transitive.

Justification:
It is reflexive because the relation does contain (0,0), (1,1), (2,2), and (3,3).
It is symmetric because the relation contains (1,3) ⋏ (3,1), and (2,3) ⋏ (3,2)
Though the relation contains (1,3) ⋏ (3,2) it does not have (1,2), which means it is not transitive.
Answered by MathMate
R1: This relations is equivalent (agree)

R2 is not equivalent right? Because it is not transitive. (agree)

R3: This relation is not equivalent because the relation contains (1,2), but not (2,1) (agree)

Excellent!
Answered by Laurey
Thank you for the reassurance.
Answered by MathMate
Keep up the good work!
There are no AI answers yet. The ability to request AI answers is coming soon!

Related Questions