Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Anonymous
I need relationship advice 2016-12-25 08:11:10 Post No. 8562393
[Report] Image search: [Google]
I need relationship advice 2016-12-25 08:11:10 Post No. 8562393
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: lkokoo.png (29KB, 703x378px) Image search:
[Google]
29KB, 703x378px
I am asked whether the relation R, defined on the set of natural numbers is reflexive/symmetric/transitive by the usual a R b
So I have ab = 1
is this relation reflexive?
I thought at first it was, since that implies that a R a = 1 and it must since if ab = 1 it implies that a is one (they're in the natural number set), the only way to get ab = 1 is that a = b = 1.
But then I also know that it is supposed to work for any a in the set, and then clearly not all natural numbers a,b have that ab=1.
So which way is the correct way to think about it?
>>
its not at all clear what relation youre even talking about
>>
What's not clear about it?
The relation R is defined on the set of natural numbers by the definition a R b , a*b = 1
is this relation reflexive or not. What is it that is not clear about this relation.
>>
>>8562445
certainly not reflexive since you dont have a R a for any a>1
>>
>>8562563
Thank you. That was the specific reasoning I wanted confirmed.
I was confused into thinking it was reflexive because I took a as a specific element (not a variable I guess) and assumed that a*b =1 means a = b = 1 (the only solution for natural numbers). and thus a*a = 1 as if it was equation solving.
But one should just think of a, b as any members of N (any number) and it has to hold for any and all of them.
Thanks.
>>
Just talk to her. You can do it man.
Thread posts: 6
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1