3
$\begingroup$

The question I'm tackling right now is this:

Give an example of a relation R on a set S that is not reflexive, transitive and not symmetric.

My answer:

Let S = {1,2,3} and let R = {(1,1), (2,2), (1,2)}. Then R is irreflexive since (s,s) is not in R for every element s of S and R is not symmetric since (1,2) is in R but (2,1) is not in R.

I dunno how to answer the transitive part. Could you please assist me in this question?

Your help would be greatly appreciated.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What about an empty relation? $\endgroup$ – dtldarek Dec 2 '14 at 0:17
2
$\begingroup$

To show that it is transitive, we have to show that if $(a,b)\in R$ and $(b,c)\in R$, then $(a,c)\in R$. In your example, $R = \{(1,1), (2,2), (1,2)\}$. So there are only two cases to check: $$(1,1)\in R\mbox{ and }(1,2)\in R,\mbox{ then }(1,2)\in R,$$ $$(1,2)\in R\mbox{ and }(2,2)\in R,\mbox{ then }(1,2)\in R.$$ Therefore, $R$ is transitive.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What about the "3" in set S? @Paul $\endgroup$ – apple Dec 2 '14 at 0:08
  • $\begingroup$ To show $R$ is transitive, we just have to look at the elements in $R$. So $3$ in $S$ is irrelevant in this case. However, to show that $R$ is reflexive, you have to show that $(a,a)\in R$ for all $a\in S$. So $R$ is not reflexive because $(3,3)\not\in R$. $\endgroup$ – Paul Dec 2 '14 at 0:10
  • $\begingroup$ I get it now. Was my answer about not reflexive and antisymmetric correct? @Paul $\endgroup$ – apple Dec 2 '14 at 0:17
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, it's correct. You can upvote or accept the answer if it is helpful to you. $\endgroup$ – Paul Dec 2 '14 at 0:18
  • $\begingroup$ It is helpful without a doubt. Cheers @Paul $\endgroup$ – apple Dec 2 '14 at 0:39

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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