Tell me more ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 0 down vote favorite

Why is this anti-symmetrical and symmetrical at the same time? I get how it is anti-symmetric because There is no pair such as (1,2) & (2,1) but how did it become symmetrical?

R is a relation on the set of integers
R = {(a,b) | a = b}
share|improve this question
If $R$ is some relation that is both antisymmetric and symmetric, what can you conclude about $R$? – wj32 Oct 7 '12 at 4:05
But how can it be symmetric when there is no pair where (a,b) & (b,a) are in the Relation where a is not equal to b? – vincentbelkin Oct 7 '12 at 4:07
What is your definition of symmetric? – wj32 Oct 7 '12 at 4:08
It's symmetric because whenever $(a,b)\in R$, then $(b,a)$ must be in $R$ also. In fact, any other relation on the integers that is both symmetric and anti-symmetric must be a subset of this one. – user22805 Oct 7 '12 at 4:08
1  
You may wish to check your definition of symmetric. You may have misunderstood it. – user22805 Oct 7 '12 at 4:14
show 2 more comments

1 Answer

up vote 1 down vote accepted

If $(a,b)$ is in $R$ then $a=b$ [by the definition given for $R$] so $(b,a)=(a,b)$ so $(b,a)$ is in $R$.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.