Questions tagged [relations]

For questions concerning partial orders, equivalence relations, properties of relations (transitive, symmetric, etc), a composition of relations, or anything else concerning a relation on a set.

A relation $R$ on a set $X \times Y$ (sometimes also called a relation between $X$ and $Y$) is any subset of $X\times Y$. So a relation is any set of ordered pairs $(x,y)$ such that $x\in X$ and $y \in Y$. Often, we write $x\mathrel R y$ instead of $(x,y)\in R$. Sometimes, we say a relation is defined on a single set $X$, but this just means that we're letting the relation $R$ be a subset of $X \times X$.

Here are some examples of relations:

  • For a very abstract example of a relation, take $X = \{1,2,3\}$ and $Y = \{a,b,c,d\}$, and let $R = \{(1,b),(3,c),(3,d),(2,c),(2,d)\}$. This $R$ is a relation on $X \times Y$. Fun fact: there are $2^{12}$ distinct relations you could put on $X \times Y$.

  • A function $f\colon X\to Y$ can be defined as a relation on $X \times Y$. The pairs in $X \times Y$ that are members of the relation are the input-output pairs $(x, f(x))$.

  • A partial order is a relation that mimics the notion of one element being greater/less than the other. An example of a partial order is the relation $\leq$ on $\mathbf{Z} \times \mathbf{Z}$ where for two integers $n$ and $m$ we say $n \leq m$ if $n$ is less than or equal to $m$.

  • Given a set $X$, let $\mathcal{P}(X)$ denote the set of all subsets of $X$. We can define a partial order $\subseteq$ on $\mathcal{P}(X)$ by saying that for two subsets $A$ and $B$ of $X$, $A \subseteq B$ if $A$ is a subset of $B$.

  • An equivalence relation is a relation that mimics the notion of two things being "equal". For example, on the set $\mathbf{Z}$ of integers let's define the relation $\equiv_{37}$ on $\mathbf{Z}\times \mathbf{Z}$ by saying $a\equiv_{37} b$ if both $a$ and $b$ give the same remainder when divided by $37$. If $a \equiv_{37} b$ we say that $a$ and $b$ are congruent modulo $37$.

  • Let $T$ be the set of all triangles in the plane. An example of an equivalence relation on $T$ is the relation of two triangles being congruent.

4727 questions
162
votes
15 answers

Are there real-life relations which are symmetric and reflexive but not transitive?

Inspired by Halmos (Naive Set Theory) . . . For each of these three possible properties [reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity], find a relation that does not have that property but does have the other two. One can construct each of these…
000
  • 5,808
106
votes
6 answers

Why isn't reflexivity redundant in the definition of equivalence relation?

An equivalence relation is defined by three properties: reflexivity, symmetry and transitivity. Doesn't symmetry and transitivity implies reflexivity? Consider the following argument. For any $a$ and $b$, $a R b$ implies $b R a$ by symmetry. Using…
41
votes
3 answers

How should I be avoiding this mistake? (To avoid missing solutions)

First of all, I am sorry if this is a question too simple or stupid. Consider the equation: $$ \log((x+2)^2) = 2 \log(5) $$ If I apply the logarithm law $ \log_a(b^c) = c \log_a(b) $ $$ \begin{align} 2 \log(x+2) & = 2 \log(5) \\ \log(x+2) &= \log(5)…
bp99
  • 1,127
32
votes
12 answers

Is a function a set or a rule?

My textbook says that a function is a set, and that it is a kind of relation, which is also a set. Now: $$f(x) = x+5$$ is called a function, but the above expression is not a set. This is also true for other functions, like trigonometric functions…
31
votes
9 answers

How to think about a quotient sets modulo an equivalence relation, and well-defined functions on the quotient set.

Perhaps there is not a correct way to think about it but I would want to know how others think about it. Here are my problems/questions, after my definitions: Definition 1. Let $X$ be a set and $\sim$ be an equivalence relation on $X$. Then…
28
votes
5 answers

Antisymmetric Relations

Given a set $\{1,2,3,4\}$, how is the following relation $R$ antisymmetric? $$R = \{(1, 2), (2, 3), (3, 4)\}$$ Note: Antisymmetric is the idea that if $(a,b)$ is in $R$ and $(b,a)$ is in $R$, then $a = b$. In my textbook it says the above is…
26
votes
1 answer

Prove that the empty relation is Transitive, Symmetric but not Reflexive

Question: Let $R$ be a relation on a set $A$. Prove that if $A$ is non-empty, the empty relation is not reflexive on $A$. the empty relation is symmetric and transitive for every set $A$. My Solution: For a relation to be reflexive: For all…
25
votes
2 answers

What is the smallest digraph whose reflexive, symmetric, transitive closures (in all combinations) are distinct?

For any given directed graph, we may consider the various closures of it with respect to reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity, in any combination, like this: For the particular graph shown above, this process results in eight distinct graphs,…
JDH
  • 45,373
25
votes
7 answers

Proof that the empty set is a relation

In the book Naive Set Theory, Halmos mentions that the "The least exciting relation is the empty one." and proves that the empty set is a set of ordered pairs because there is no element of the empty set that is not an ordered pair. Since the empty…
Budge
  • 294
24
votes
6 answers

'Does not necessarily equal' symbol

What symbol would I use if I wanted to express that, in the context of some binary relation $P$ implied from context, that $\exists (a,b)\in P: a\ne b$, but not to the extent that $\forall (a,b) \in P: a\ne b$. The use of this would be if one were…
AJMansfield
  • 1,043
24
votes
1 answer

Relations that ensure continuity

We say that a function $f: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ preserves the binary relation $\sim \subseteq \mathbb{R}^2$ if $x \sim y$ implies $f(x) \sim f(y)$ for all $x,y\in\mathbb{R}$. We say that $\sim$ ensures continuity if every function $f:…
Z. A. K.
  • 13,310
24
votes
4 answers

Understanding equivalence class, equivalence relation, partition

I'm having difficulty grasping a couple of set theory concepts, specifically concepts dealing with relations. Here are the ones I'm having trouble with and their definitions. 1) The collection of equivalence classes w.r.t. $R$ Def: Let $R$ be an…
23
votes
10 answers

Why is belonging not transitive?

From Halmos's Naive Set Theory, section 1: Observe, along the same lines, that inclusion is transitive, whereas belonging is not. Everyday examples, involving, for instance, super-organizations whose members are organizations, will readily occur to…
22
votes
3 answers

Symbol for unknown relation?

When solving equations like $$\begin{align} 4x-4 &=\frac{(2x)^2}{x} \\ -4 &= \frac{4x^2}{x} -4x \\ -4 &= 4x -4x \\[0.2em] -4 &= 0\end{align}$$ using the equality-symbol feels like abuse of notation, since you'll end up with $-4=0$, which is not an…
Frank Vel
  • 5,507
21
votes
6 answers

Number of relations that are both symmetric and reflexive

Consider a non-empty set A containing n objects. How many relations on A are both symmetric and reflexive? The answer to this is $2^p$ where $p=$ $n \choose 2$. However, I dont understand why this is so. Can anyone explain this?
Snowman
  • 2,754
1
2 3
99 100