Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a set of relations, shown below:

$R=\{(a,b), (b,c), (c,a)\}$ for $A= \{a,b,c\}$

According to my professor, this relation is transitive but I don't understand why. I was under the impression that any given three relations of a set of relations have to follow the $aRb, bRc, aRc$ pattern but since $aRc$ isn't in the set then it'd fail the test since $aRc$ and $cRa$ aren't equivalent. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I don't understand what.

share|cite|improve this question
Probably there is a typo and $(c,a)$ should be $(a,c)$. The relation as written is not transitive. In fact, there are three reasons: (1) $aRb\wedge bRc$ but not $aRc$; (2) $bRc \wedge cRa$ but not $bRa$; (3) $cRa\wedge aRb$ but not $cRb$. – vadim123 May 27 '13 at 22:13
Either there's a typo, as Vadim pointed, or your prof. is wrong. – DonAntonio May 27 '13 at 22:17
You don't have a set of relations, you have only one relation, $R$. – Prateek Dec 30 '13 at 14:56
up vote 5 down vote accepted

As expressed, the relation $R$ fails to be transitive. Indeed, we need $(a, c) \in R$ and instead of $(c, a) \in R$, as $(c, a)$ poses a number of problems in terms of the relation being transitive:

As written:

  • $(a, b), (b, c) \in R,$ but $(a, c) \notin R$, as you observe.
  • Furthermore: $(c, a), (a, b) \in R$ but $(c, b) \notin R$.
  • And, $(b, c), (c, a) \in R$, but $(b, a)\notin R$.

For each reason above, transitivity fails.

So $(c, a) \in R$ seems to be the ill-placed, perhaps misprinted pair in $R$, which if replaced by $(a, c)$ would alleviate these failures, and the relation would then be transitive.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks for the quick responses, everybody. I noticed this practice exam that we received in class has solutions with a few (assumed) typographical issues. A follow up question: Is a set of relations R={(a,a), (b,b), (c,c)} also not transitive? At a glance I want to say no since I can't see any logical link that would let me say aRc, but I'm really not very good at mathematics as a whole and this is all one big uphill battle for me – Harry Tuttle May 27 '13 at 23:00
Yes, to your follow up question: it is vacuously true that it is transitive, since there are no counterexamples for which it is NOT transitive. A relation has a property, unless a counterexample exists. Your follow-up relation is symmetric, for the same reason. – amWhy May 27 '13 at 23:23
Excellent information. Thank you! – Harry Tuttle May 27 '13 at 23:59
You're welcome, Harry! Just hang in'll get the hang of the class! – amWhy May 28 '13 at 0:00
@amWhy: nice discourse ... +1 – Amzoti May 28 '13 at 0:36

Your Answer


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.