I remember this problem from Apostol's calculus textbook.
Let
be a commutative and transitive relation over a non-empty set. Show this proof is flawed:
is also reflexive over the set.
I asked this online like few months ago. One of the people said something about it is related to logic and I should figure it out by looking over the definition of the relations.
I thought of this again, and put it up on Facebook. Thx to Sackel sending me part of this Wikipedia article on equivalence relation.
The empty relation R on a non-empty set X (i.e. aRb is never true) is vacuously symmetric and transitive, but not reflexive.
awesome, now I see how this is not true.
First, here are the definition of the 3 kind of relations.
(reflexive)
(commutative)
(transitive)

but that doesn't mean
. So the last step of the proof was wrong.
Logic. I see.
Comments
thanx a lot
thanx a lot
very very thanx
very very thanx
asdassdad
Ne spamı a.q
bit ilaçlama
bit ilaçlaması bit
oyun oyunlar thanks
flash oyunlar ameliyat oyunları Oyun|Flash Oyun Sitesi
wooow, that is amazing and
wooow, that is amazing and pure nice. Thank you.
re
good..
thanks for info..
estetik
-
cilt bakımı
-
dekorasyon
prefabrik ev fiyatları
-
çeyrek altın fiyatları
thanks for
thanks for info
dekorasyon
diyet
nice comments about
bedava
islami
mirc
mirc indir
KAMERALI mirc
sohbet odalari
sohbet siteleri
mynet sohbet
sohbet et
Seviyeli Sohbet
cinsel sohbet
porno sohbet
sohbet siteleri
bedava sohbet
mirc sohbet
mirc script indir
cet
cinsellik sohbet
garanti arkadas
sohbet yap
Post new comment