Equivalence Relation

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
  • Discrete Mathematics: Equivalence Relation
    Topics discussed:
    1) The definition of discrete mathematics.
    2) Example problems to find out if the given relation is an equivalence relation.
    Follow Neso Academy on Instagram: @nesoacademy(bit.ly/2XP63OE)
    Follow me on Instagram: @jaspreetedu(bit.ly/2YX26E5)
    Contribute: www.nesoacadem...
    Memberships: bit.ly/2U7YSPI
    Books: www.nesoacadem...
    Website ► www.nesoacadem...
    Forum ► forum.nesoacad...
    Facebook ► goo.gl/Nt0PmB
    Twitter ► / nesoacademy
    Music:
    Axol x Alex Skrindo - You [NCS Release]
    #DiscreteMathematicsByNeso #DiscreteMaths #Relations #EquivalenceRelation

Комментарии • 98

  • @seradfb345
    @seradfb345 Год назад +39

    For those who said it is not transitive, I think a possible misconception of transitivity means that a given number can relate to any other number in the set, but this is not what transitivity means:
    Definition:
    A relation is transitive if xRy and yRz, then xRz.
    Example:
    To clarify, the definition of x here is the first element of a pair from R1 and so on.
    For example looking at R1 we can decide x to be any first value from all of the pairs in R1. Let's say we decide that x = 2
    The only pair which contains 2 is (2,2).
    Now, referring to the definition of transitive above, y in this case must be the second item of the chosen pair which is 2.
    xRy = (2,2)
    As we know that y = 2, to find z we look for the second item of a pair with 2 in. Again (2,2) is the only pair, so it follows that z = 2.
    yRz = (2,2)
    As x = 2 and z = 2, we can see that it holds true that xRz = (2,2)
    So the definition holds true: if (2,2) and (2,2) then (2,2)
    x and y would always be the same number though. They could not be different because there is no such pair.
    Proof:
    An easy way to check if a matrix is in fact transitive is by the theorem which states:
    A relation is transitive if and only if R² ⊆ R
    (In this example it means basically the squared matrix does not contain a 1 anywhere the original matrix does not)
    In example one the matrix (M) for R1 is just the identity matrix:
    M=
    1 0 0 0
    0 1 0 0
    0 0 1 0
    0 0 0 1
    M² =
    1 0 0 0
    0 1 0 0
    0 0 1 0
    0 0 0 1
    so M² ⊆ M
    Therefore R1 is transitive.

  • @sigmapiebonds3191
    @sigmapiebonds3191 Год назад +8

    Literally in love with the content. It proved so helpful for me as its my exam tomorrow and found this gem!!! So well explained; our clg teachers dont even gives so precisely

  • @TammanaSultanaFood
    @TammanaSultanaFood 2 года назад +75

    for the first example, if something is reflexive, is it automatically transitive and symmetric? you didn't go over that but i know its symmetric but i am struggling with transitive.

    • @salimelghersse4822
      @salimelghersse4822 Год назад +13

      it is not transitive i guess it's a mistake

    • @naveedahmedsoomro4354
      @naveedahmedsoomro4354 Год назад +7

      If something is reflexive it's not mean that it's also a transitive because in some situations reflexive isn't a transitive

    • @ramanjaneyuluv479
      @ramanjaneyuluv479 Год назад +8

      It is transitive because there are no different elements to compare by default we consider it as transitive only even it is same with the symmetric also

    • @axelsanchez5849
      @axelsanchez5849 Год назад

      No, they are 3 different properties

    • @sahilchaudhary2412
      @sahilchaudhary2412 Год назад +21

      ​@@salimelghersse4822yes it is transitive bcz property says if there is (a,b) belongs to R and (b,c) belongs to R then there should be exists (a,c)......soo here (a,b) and (b,c) is not present soo there is no need to have (a,c) therefore it is transitive.....hope it helps

  • @danichef
    @danichef Год назад +23

    For everyone wondering about R1:
    A relation is transitive if
    aRb and bRc imply aRc.
    R={(1,1), (2,2), (3,3)}
    Let’s consider all the cases where aRb and bRc, There are only three ways this can happen:
    a=1; b=1; c=1
    a=2; b=2; c=2
    a=3; b=3; c=3
    In every single case, we have aRc. aRb and bRc imply aRc.

  • @masteradil
    @masteradil 9 месяцев назад +3

    Can you clear R1 please?
    How is it symmetric and transitive

  • @kainaatmakhani6550
    @kainaatmakhani6550 2 года назад +8

    You are brilliant sir. Thank you so much for making us understand hard concepts easily.

  • @damirkoblev4333
    @damirkoblev4333 Год назад +10

    Thanks a lot! But I still can't understand how can the first relation be transitive if all pairs consist from the same elements and do not connect with other ones?

    • @nabilwalidrafi5679
      @nabilwalidrafi5679 Год назад

      Transitive Definition:
      if all pairs consist from the same elements and do not connect with other ones

    • @zubaerahammed
      @zubaerahammed Год назад +3

      The condition is if (a,b) and (b,c) belongs to R, then (a,c) belongs to R. But in that relation, there is no such (a,b) and (b,c). So, there is nothing to check against for its transitivity. It will not be transitive only if there are (a,b) and (b,c) ordered pairs present and there is no (a,c) present.

  • @himanshumaurya428
    @himanshumaurya428 3 года назад +16

    How is the first relation equivalence? How is it transitive?

    • @Tenaciousplays01
      @Tenaciousplays01 2 года назад +6

      Its not transitive,he made mistake

    • @himanshumaurya428
      @himanshumaurya428 2 года назад

      @@Tenaciousplays01 yeah

    • @nmm6167
      @nmm6167 2 года назад +7

      I asked about that and someone told me if there isn't condition then its transitive

    • @trusttheprocess4775
      @trusttheprocess4775 2 года назад +20

      No, he is right. If there are simply no conditions in the relation to check if the relation is transitive or not, then it is transitive. In the question, there was no (a,b) and neither (b,c) hence there were no conditions to check (a,c) whether it belonged to R or not, hence it is still transitive.

    • @himanshumaurya428
      @himanshumaurya428 2 года назад +3

      @@trusttheprocess4775 oh is that so. thanks mate

  • @faizazam4256
    @faizazam4256 Год назад +1

    For Equivalance Relation all 3 has to be satisfied or one is enough.
    As you say R2 in not reflexive and yes they are not but they are symmetric and transitive
    Are they not equivalence?... Please Reply...🙏🏻

  • @varzhenenithiyananthan860
    @varzhenenithiyananthan860 2 года назад +3

    Can you solve the question ?? Let R be an equivalence relation on a set A, and let a€A and b€A. Prove that aRb if and only if R(a)=R(b).

  • @JuliaGugulski
    @JuliaGugulski Год назад +1

    Best video on RUclips.

  • @soummossj2624
    @soummossj2624 2 года назад +5

    On example one R2 you said it is not reflexive because there is no (1,1) ...there is not a single element of 1 here.. so I think its safe to say 1 doesn't exist in this relation...so its reflexive, symmetric but not transitive. Please take the time to provide correction in the desc.

    • @ronakop2357
      @ronakop2357 3 месяца назад

      it is transitive as well, it is an equivalence relation

  • @gamer-zy1uj
    @gamer-zy1uj 3 года назад +2

    Thankyou sir❤️❤️❤️🙏🙏

  • @anupamagarwal3976
    @anupamagarwal3976 Год назад +4

    Sir, How R1 a transitive relation ?

    • @alibekbalkybekov4809
      @alibekbalkybekov4809 Год назад +1

      If there aren't different pairs of elements like (1,2) or (2,3) we don't need to check them them for transitive

  • @siddheshpandey7905
    @siddheshpandey7905 4 месяца назад +1

    R3 is not transitive

  • @jaybansod44
    @jaybansod44 2 года назад +1

    Create one discrete mathematics play list

  • @دانيهالعيد
    @دانيهالعيد 2 года назад +2

    Thank you for this amazing explanation!

  • @E_Hooligan
    @E_Hooligan 2 года назад +2

    Amazing explanation, thanks!

  • @Bnbnayak
    @Bnbnayak 4 месяца назад

    Thank you sir😊

  • @amarsgamer7752
    @amarsgamer7752 3 года назад +1

    Thank u sir 🙏🙏 ❤️😘

  • @AbhishekThakur-fk7px
    @AbhishekThakur-fk7px Год назад

    Thank you so much sir.

  • @goodnightvids
    @goodnightvids Год назад

    This guy is great

  • @sachingaming6169
    @sachingaming6169 3 месяца назад

    Thank u so much sir😊

  • @LexyMrLee9111
    @LexyMrLee9111 Год назад

    Well explain sir.....

  • @MathCuriousity
    @MathCuriousity 9 месяцев назад

    Hi may I pose a question: let’s say we have an equivalence relation aRb. Why can’t I represent this within set theory as set T comprising subset of Cartesian product of a and b, mapped to a set U which contains true or false? Thanks so much!!

  • @codex7299
    @codex7299 Год назад

    Thank you❤

  • @amnakhawaja1548
    @amnakhawaja1548 2 года назад +1

    how is R1 transitive? there's no c but (a,a)

  • @laibahameed4212
    @laibahameed4212 2 года назад

    No,R1 is not an equivalent relation,for equivalence relation a function must hold the properties of reflexive, symmetric, transitive,it doesn't hold transitive relation

  • @tim-duncan2137
    @tim-duncan2137 Год назад

    Thank you sir

  • @peterchimbuto4095
    @peterchimbuto4095 2 года назад

    Thanks

  • @14tajmohammadansari33
    @14tajmohammadansari33 2 года назад

    nice explanation sir

  • @swarnaganesh5693
    @swarnaganesh5693 2 года назад +1

    thank you :)))

  • @karmaxscience3632
    @karmaxscience3632 3 года назад

    Upload more videos on data structures and algorithms sir.

  • @jaysonjamesalvarez1572
    @jaysonjamesalvarez1572 3 месяца назад

    its like an entire semester in 6 mins thank you man, gotta take this exam in a few hours

  • @navdeepkaur2131
    @navdeepkaur2131 2 года назад

    Amazing

  • @samratbarui.
    @samratbarui. Год назад

    Thanku sir

  • @jadibamaniya9948
    @jadibamaniya9948 6 месяцев назад

    Very well explained.. Up to point...

  • @madihadrawingacademy4823
    @madihadrawingacademy4823 Год назад

    how R1 is symetric

  • @ritchmondjamestajarros4439
    @ritchmondjamestajarros4439 2 года назад

    In the first equivalence, why is it symmetric?

  • @nikhilnaidu7899
    @nikhilnaidu7899 2 года назад

    excellent

  • @gmoney_swag1274
    @gmoney_swag1274 5 месяцев назад +1

    I love you

  • @adithyadinesh9832
    @adithyadinesh9832 2 года назад +1

    Approved by Hanena

  • @avirajbhandari9811
    @avirajbhandari9811 10 месяцев назад

    Thank you! This is very helpful.

  • @hannahferrera5591
    @hannahferrera5591 Год назад

    Is the relation number 4 really not a symmetric? I am confused. What I have learned in class is that if (a, b) element of R, then (b, a) must be an element of R too. And this property does not need to be true for all elements.

    • @hannahferrera5591
      @hannahferrera5591 Год назад

      What I am trying to imply is there should be at least one pair of element that is symmetric. In the Video, there is (2,0) in R as well as (0,2). Hence, the relation is symmetric.

    • @harshitasharma7665
      @harshitasharma7665 8 месяцев назад +1

      Property need to be true for all elements.

  • @kosumeghanameghana3360
    @kosumeghanameghana3360 2 года назад

    Excellent explanation sir,tq soo much

  • @animeshhazra6061
    @animeshhazra6061 Год назад

    Nice

  • @rahelina7176
    @rahelina7176 Год назад

    All of this is good but I do not get how R6 is transitive. Thank you anyways.

  • @user-es3pq9lz4r
    @user-es3pq9lz4r 2 года назад +1

    Can Anyone tell me how can I understand AXA ?? I will appreciate if any one can help me in this plz

    • @akarusardarbekova5927
      @akarusardarbekova5927 2 года назад

      A x A={(a,a), (a,b), (b,a), (b,b)} which has 4 elements.

    • @sumrelachaunria8776
      @sumrelachaunria8776 2 года назад

      If A={a,b} where a and b are elements then AXA={(a,a),(a,b),(b,a),(b,b)}

    • @SKP2102
      @SKP2102 3 месяца назад

      AXA simply means the Cartesian product from a Non-empty Set A to the same set B which means mapping of every element of A with each element of A. So create one by one all the ordered pairs from setA to set A

  • @hhhhhhha954
    @hhhhhhha954 Год назад

    sorry why AxA is surely to be equivilant

    • @seradfb345
      @seradfb345 Год назад

      AXA contains all possible pairs.
      The matrix for AXA in this case would look like this:
      1 1 1 1
      1 1 1 1
      1 1 1 1
      1 1 1 1
      If the diagonal line from top left to bottom right contains 1s, then it is reflexive.
      If you put a mirror along the same line and see reflection for all the other entries then it is symmetric.
      And hopefully you can also see how it can be transitive also.
      The point is AXA contains all possible pairs of the set

  • @Rocker123uk
    @Rocker123uk 23 дня назад

    Correction: R3 is not transitive

  • @tanveersingh3196
    @tanveersingh3196 2 года назад

    That relation in first seconds of video wasnt transitive

  • @anesumukombachoto8525
    @anesumukombachoto8525 11 месяцев назад +2

    This a lie ,he is a liar

  • @umgsbed3922
    @umgsbed3922 4 месяца назад

    ما عم افهمكسمس

  • @vipinyadav6661
    @vipinyadav6661 2 месяца назад

    Example 1 - Transitive 😂😂😂. But How If (aRb) & (bRc) then must be (aRc) but there is (cRa) . So not Transitive 🤫.

  • @hrithikIITR25
    @hrithikIITR25 Год назад

    😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍

  • @weinerblut6869
    @weinerblut6869 Год назад

    What a crummy explanation. Have you shown people here what reflexive, symmetric and transitive mean? Have you done anything else other than say it's obvious yes or obvious no.

  • @shreedevis8019
    @shreedevis8019 3 года назад +5

    You are brilliant sir.Thank you so much for making us understand hard concepts easily.

  • @ahmetkarakartal9563
    @ahmetkarakartal9563 2 года назад

    thank you so much

  • @adyiebanerjee
    @adyiebanerjee 2 года назад

    Thanks

  • @shauny4596
    @shauny4596 2 года назад

    R1 is not transitive

  • @lubnaansari3948
    @lubnaansari3948 2 года назад

    Thank you so much sir