Book of Proof

Home > Other > Book of Proof > Page 25
Book of Proof Page 25

by Richard Hammack


  Rather than focusing on each relation individually (an impossible task

  anyway since there are infinitely many different relations), we will develop

  a general theory that encompasses all relations.

  Understanding this

  general theory will give us the conceptual framework and language needed

  to understand and discuss any specific relation.

  Before stating the theoretical definition of a relation, let’s look at a

  motivational example. This example will lead naturally to our definition.

  Consider the set A = ©1, 2, 3, 4, 5ª. (There’s nothing special about this

  particular set; any set of numbers would do for this example.) Elements of

  A can be compared to each other by the symbol “<.” For example, 1 < 4,

  2 < 3, 2 < 4, and so on. You have no trouble understanding this because the

  notion of numeric order is so ingrained. But imagine you had to explain

  it to an idiot savant, one with an obsession for detail but absolutely no

  understanding of the meaning of (or relationships between) integers. You

  might consider writing down for your student the following set:

  R = © (1,2),(1,3),(1,4),(1,5),(2,3),(2,4),(2,5),(3,4),(3,5),(4,5) ª.

  176

  Relations

  The set R encodes the meaning of the < relation for elements in A. An

  ordered pair (a, b) appears in the set if and only if a < b. If asked whether

  or not it is true that 3 < 4, your student could look through R until he

  found the ordered pair (3, 4); then he would know 3 < 4 is true. If asked

  about 5 < 2, he would see that (5, 2) does not appear in R, so 5 6< 2. The set

  R, which is a subset of A × A, completely describes the relation < for A.

  Though it may seem simple-minded at first, this is exactly the idea

  we will use for our main definition. This definition is general enough to

  describe not just the relation < for the set A = ©1, 2, 3, 4, 5ª, but any relation

  for any set A.

  Definition 11.1

  A relation on a set A is a subset R ⊆ A × A. We often

  abbreviate the statement (x, y) ∈ R as xR y. The statement (x, y) ∉ R is

  abbreviated as x 6R y.

  Notice that a relation is a set, so we can use what we know about sets

  to understand and explore relations. But before getting deeper into the

  theory of relations, let’s look at some examples of Definition 11.1.

  Example 11.1

  Let A = ©1, 2, 3, 4ª, and consider the following set:

  R = ©(1,1),(2,1),(2,2),(3,3),(3,2),(3,1),(4,4),(4,3),(4,2),(4,1)ª ⊆ A × A.

  The set R is a relation on A, by Definition 11.1. Since (1, 1) ∈ R, we have

  1R1. Similarly 2R1 and 2R2, and so on. However, notice that (for example)

  (3, 4) ∉ R, so 36R 4. Observe that R is the familiar relation ≥ for the set A.

  Chapter 1 proclaimed that all of mathematics can be described with

  sets. Just look at how successful this program has been! The greater-

  than-or-equal-to relation is now a set R. (We might even express this in

  the rather cryptic form ≥= R.)

  Example 11.2

  Let A = ©1, 2, 3, 4ª, and consider the following set:

  S = ©(1,1),(1,3),(3,1),(3,3),(2,2),(2,4),(4,2),(4,4)ª ⊆ A × A.

  Here we have 1S1, 1S3, 4S2, etc., but 3 6S 4 and 2 6S 1. What does S mean?

  Think of it as meaning “has the same parity as. ” Thus 1S1 reads “1 has

  the same parity as 1,” and 4S2 reads “4 has the same parity as 2.”

  Example 11.3

  Consider relations R and S of the previous two examples.

  Note that R ∩S = ©(1, 1), (2, 2), (3, 3), (3, 1), (4, 4), (4, 2)ª ⊆ A × A is a relation on A.

  The expression x(R ∩ S) y means “x ≥ y , and x, y have the same parity. ”

  177

  Example 11.4

  Let B = ©0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5ª, and consider the following set:

  U = ©(1,3),(3,3),(5,2),(2,5),(4,2)ª ⊆ B × B.

  Then U is a relation on B because U ⊆ B × B. You may be hard-pressed

  to invent any “meaning” for this particular relation. A relation does not

  have to have any meaning. Any random subset of B × B is a relation on B,

  whether or not it describes anything familiar.

  Some relations can be described with pictures. For example, we can

  depict the above relation U on B by drawing points labeled by elements of

  B. The statement (x, y) ∈ U is then represented by an arrow pointing from

  x to y, a graphic symbol meaning “x relates to y.” Here’s a picture of U:

  0

  1

  2

  3

  4

  5

  The next picture illustrates the relation R on the set A = ©a, b, c, dª, where

  xR y means x comes before y in the alphabet. According to Definition 11.1,

  as a set this relation is R = ©(a, b), (a, c), (a, d), (b, c), (b, d), (c, d)ª. You may

  feel that the picture conveys the relation better than the set does. They

  are two different ways of expressing the same thing. In some instances

  pictures are more convenient than sets for discussing relations.

  a

  d

  c

  b

  Although such diagrams can help us visualize relations, they do have

  their limitations. If A and R were infinite, then the diagram would be

  impossible to draw, but the set R might be easily expressed in set-builder

  notation. Here are some examples.

  Example 11.5

  Consider the set R = ©(x, y) ∈ Z × Z : x − y ∈ Nª ⊆ Z × Z. This

  is the > relation on the set A = Z. It is infinite because there are infinitely

  many ways to have x > y where x and y are integers.

  Example 11.6

  The set R = ©(x, x) : x ∈ Rª ⊆ R × R is the relation = on the

  set R, because xR y means the same thing as x = y. Thus R is a set that

  expresses the notion of equality of real numbers.

  178

  Relations

  Exercises for Section 11.0

  1. Let A = ©0,1,2,3,4,5ª. Write out the relation R that expresses > on A. Then

  illustrate it with a diagram.

  2. Let A = ©1,2,3,4,5,6ª. Write out the relation R that expresses | (divides) on A.

  Then illustrate it with a diagram.

  3. Let A = ©0,1,2,3,4,5ª. Write out the relation R that expresses ≥ on A. Then

  illustrate it with a diagram.

  4. Here is a diagram for a relation R on a set A. Write the sets A and R.

  0

  1

  2

  3

  4

  5

  5. Here is a diagram for a relation R on a set A. Write the sets A and R.

  0

  1

  2

  3

  4

  5

  6. Congruence modulo 5 is a relation on the set A = Z. In this relation xR y means

  x ≡ y (mod 5). Write out the set R in set-builder notation.

  7. Write the relation < on the set A = Z as a subset R of Z × Z. This is an infinite

  set, so you will have to use set-builder notation.

  8. Let A = ©1,2,3,4,5,6ª. Observe that ; ⊆ A × A, so R = ; is a relation on A. Draw

  a diagram for this relation.

  9. Let A = ©1,2,3,4,5,6ª. How many different relations are there on the set A?

  10. Consider the subset R = (R × R) − ©(x, x) : x ∈ Rª ⊆ R × R. What familiar relation on

  R is this? Explain.

  11. Given a finite set A, how many different relations are the
re on A?

  In the following exercises, subsets R of R2 = R × R or Z2 = Z × Z are indicated by

  gray shading. In each case, R is a familiar relation on R or Z. State it.

  R

  R

  12.

  13.

  14.

  15.

  Properties of Relations

  179

  11.1 Properties of Relations

  A relational expression xR y is a statement (or an open sentence); it is either

  true or false. For example, 5 < 10 is true, and 10 < 5 is false. (Thus an

  operation like + is not a relation, because, for instance, 5+10 has a numeric

  value, not a T/F value.) Since relational expressions have T/F values, we

  can combine them with logical operators; for example, xR y ⇒ yR x is a

  statement or open sentence whose truth or falsity may depend on x and y.

  With this in mind, note that some relations have properties that others

  don’t have. For example, the relation ≤ on Z satisfies x ≤ x for every x ∈ Z.

  But this is not so for < because x < x is never true. The next definition

  lays out three particularly significant properties that relations may have.

  Definition 11.2

  Suppose R is a relation on a set A.

  1. Relation R is reflexive if xR x for every x ∈ A.

  That is, R is reflexive if ∀ x ∈ A, xR x.

  2. Relation R is symmetric if xR y implies yR x for all x, y ∈ A

  That is, R is symmetric if ∀ x, y ∈ A, xR y ⇒ yR x.

  3. Relation R is transitive if whenever xR y and yR z, then also xR z.

  That is, R is transitive if ∀ x, y, z ∈ A, ¡(xR y) ∧ ( yR z)¢ ⇒ xR z.

  To illustrate this, let’s consider the set A = Z. Examples of reflexive

  relations on Z include ≤, =, and |, because x ≤ x, x = x and x | x are all true

  for any x ∈ Z. On the other hand, >, <, 6= and - are not reflexive for none

  of the statements x < x, x > x, x 6= x and x - x is ever true.

  The relation 6= is symmetric, for if x 6= y, then surely y 6= x also. Also,

  the relation = is symmetric because x = y always implies y = x.

  The relation ≤ is not symmetric, as x ≤ y does not necessarily imply

  y ≤ x. For instance 5 ≤ 6 is true, but 6 ≤ 5 is false. Notice (x ≤ y) ⇒ (y ≤ x)

  is true for some x and y (for example, it is true when x = 2 and y = 2), but

  still ≤ is not symmetric because it is not the case that (x ≤ y) ⇒ ( y ≤ x) is

  true for all integers x and y.

  The relation ≤ is transitive because whenever x ≤ y and y ≤ z, it also

  is true that x ≤ z. Likewise <, ≥, > and = are all transitive. Examine the

  following table and be sure you understand why it is labeled as it is.

  Relations on Z:

  <

  ≤

  =

  |

  -

  6=

  Reflexive

  no

  yes

  yes

  yes

  no

  no

  Symmetric

  no

  no

  yes

  no

  no

  yes

  Transitive

  yes

  yes

  yes

  yes

  no

  no

  180

  Relations

  Example 11.7

  Here A = ©b, c, d, eª, and R is the following relation on A:

  R = ©(b, b),(b, c),(c, b),(c, c),(d, d),(b, d),(d, b),(c, d),(d, c)ª.

  This relation is not reflexive, for although bRb, cR c and dRd, it is not

  true that eR e. For a relation to be reflexive, xR x must be true for all x ∈ A.

  The relation R is symmetric, because whenever we have xR y, it follows

  that yR x too. Observe that bR c and cRb; bRd and dRb; dR c and cRd.

  Take away the ordered pair (c, b) from R, and R is no longer symmetric.

  The relation R is transitive, but it takes some work to check it. We

  must check that the statement (xR y ∧ yR z) ⇒ xR z is true for all x, y, z ∈ A.

  For example, taking x = b, y = c and z = d, we have (bR c ∧ cRd) ⇒ bRd,

  which is the true statement (T ∧ T) ⇒ T. Likewise, (bRd ∧ dR c) ⇒ bR c is

  the true statement (T ∧ T) ⇒ T. Take note that if x = b, y = e and z = c,

  then (bR e ∧ eR c) ⇒ bR c becomes (F ∧ F) ⇒ T, which is still true. It’s not

  much fun, but going through all the combinations, you can verify that

  (xR y ∧ yRz) ⇒ xRz is true for all choices x, y, z ∈ A. (Try at least a few of

  them.)

  The relation R from Example 11.7 has a meaning. You can think of

  xR y as meaning that x and y are both consonants. Thus bRc because b

  and c are both consonants; but b 6R e because it’s not true that b and e are

  both consonants. Once we look at it this way, it’s immediately clear that R

  has to be transitive. If x and y are both consonants and y and z are both

  consonants, then surely x and z are both consonants. This illustrates a

  point that we will see again later in this section: Knowing the meaning of

  a relation can help us understand it and prove things about it.

  Here is a picture of R. Notice that we can immediately spot several

  properties of R that may not have been so clear from its set description.

  For instance, we see that R is not reflexive because it lacks a loop at e,

  hence e 6R e.

  c

  e

  d

  b

  Figure 11.1. The relation R from Example 11.7

  Properties of Relations

  181

  In what follows, we summarize how to spot the various properties of a

  relation from its diagram. Compare these with Figure 11.1.

  A relation is

  1.

  reflexive if

  x

  ...there is a

  x

  loop at x:

  for each point x ...

  A relation is

  symmetric

  ...there is also

  if

  an arrow from

  2.

  whenever there is an

  x

  y

  x

  y

  y back to x:

  arrow from x to y ...

  A relation is

  transitive

  y

  ...there is also

  y

  if

  an arrow from

  whenever there are

  x to z:

  arrows from x to y

  x

  z

  x

  z

  and y to z ...

  3.

  y

  (If x = z, this means

  y

  ...there is also

  that if there are

  a loop from

  arrows from x to y

  x back to x.)

  and from y to x ...

  x

  x

  Consider the bottom diagram in Box 3, above. The transitive property

  demands (xR y ∧ yR x) ⇒ xR x. Thus, if xR y and yR x in a transitive relation,

  then also xR x, so there is a loop at x. In this case ( yR x ∧ xR y) ⇒ yR y, so

  there will be a loop at y too.

  Although these visual aids can be illuminating, their use is limited be-

  cause many relations are too large and complex to be adequately described

  as diagrams. For example, it would be impossible to draw a diagram

  for the relation ≡ (mod n), where n ∈ N. Such a relation would best be

  explained
in a more theoretical (and less visual) way.

  We next prove that ≡ (mod n) is reflexive, symmetric and transitive.

  Obviously we will not glean this from a drawing. Instead we will prove it

  from the properties of ≡ (mod n) and Definition 11.2. Pay attention to this

  example. It illustrates how to prove things about relations.

  182

  Relations

  Example 11.8

  Prove the following proposition.

  Proposition

  Let n ∈ N. The relation ≡ (mod n) on the set Z is reflexive,

  symmetric and transitive.

  Proof. First we will show that ≡ (mod n) is reflexive. Take any integer x ∈ Z,

  and observe that n | 0, so n | (x − x). By definition of congruence modulo n,

  we have x ≡ x (mod n). This shows x ≡ x (mod n) for every x ∈ Z, so ≡ (mod n)

  is reflexive.

  Next, we will show that ≡ (mod n) is symmetric. For this, we must show

  that for all x, y ∈ Z, the condition x ≡ y (mod n) implies that y ≡ x (mod n).

  We use direct proof. Suppose x ≡ y (mod n). Thus n | (x − y) by definition

  of congruence modulo n. Then x − y = na for some a ∈ Z by definition of

  divisibility. Multiplying both sides by −1 gives y − x = n(−a). Therefore

  n | (y − x), and this means y ≡ x (mod n). We’ve shown that x ≡ y (mod n)

  implies that y ≡ x (mod n), and this means ≡ (mod n) is symmetric.

  Finally we will show that ≡ (mod n) is transitive. For this we must

  show that if x ≡ y (mod n) and y ≡ z (mod n), then x ≡ z (mod n). Again

  we use direct proof.

  Suppose x ≡ y (mod n) and y ≡ z (mod n).

  This

  means n | (x − y) and n | ( y − z). Therefore there are integers a and b for

  which x − y = na and y − z = nb. Adding these two equations, we obtain

  x− z = na+nb. Consequently, x− z = n(a+b), so n | (x− z), hence x ≡ z (mod n).

  This completes the proof that ≡ (mod n) is transitive.

  The past three paragraphs have shown that ≡ (mod n) is reflexive,

  symmetric and transitive, so the proof is complete.

  ■

  As you continue with mathematics you will find that the reflexive,

  symmetric and transitive properties take on special significance in a

  variety of settings.

  In preparation for this, the next section explores

  further consequences of these properties.

  But first work some of the

  following exercises.

  Exercises for Section 11.1

  1. Consider the relation R = ©(a, a),(b, b),(c, c),(d, d),(a, b),(b, a)ª on set A = ©a, b, c, dª.

  Is R reflexive? Symmetric? Transitive? If a property does not hold, say why.

  2. Consider the relation R = ©(a, b),(a, c),(c, c),(b, b),(c, b),(b, c)ª on the set A = ©a, b, cª.

 

‹ Prev