[Home]History of EquivalenceRelation

HomePage | RecentChanges | Preferences

Revision 6 . . (edit) January 29, 2001 9:03 am by JoshuaGrosse
Revision 5 . . (edit) January 25, 2001 3:35 pm by JoshuaGrosse
Revision 4 . . (edit) January 25, 2001 1:54 pm by JoshuaGrosse
Revision 3 . . (edit) January 25, 2001 1:44 pm by JoshuaGrosse
Revision 2 . . January 25, 2001 1:09 pm by JoshuaGrosse [good place to put the definition of a quotient set]
Revision 1 . . January 25, 2001 1:04 pm by JoshuaGrosse [good place to put the definition of a quotient set]
  

Difference (from prior major revision) (minor diff)

Changed: 1c1
An equivalence relation ~ on a set X is a RelatioN? satisfying the following conditions: for every a,b,c in X,
An equivalence relation ~ on a SeT X is a MathematicalRelation satisfying the following conditions: for every a,b,c in X,

Changed: 7c7
Given any x in X, we define the equivalence class of x to be the set [x] = {y in G : x~y}. The set of all such equivalence classes is called the quotient X/~. These form a partition of X, and conversely any partition of X is a quotient X/~ for some equivalence relation ~.
Given any x in X, we define the equivalence class of x to be the set [x] = {y in G : x~y}. The equivalence classes form a partition of X, and conversely every partition of x corresponds to some unique equivalence relation ~.

Changed: 9c9,11
A trivial example of an equivalence relation is equality. X = X/(=) for any set X.
The set of all equivalence classes is denoted X/~, and called a quotient set. In cases where X has some additional structure preserved under ~, the quotient naturally becomes an object of the same type; the map that sends x to [x] is then a HomoMorphism.

Equality always defines an equivalence relation, and in fact it is minimal. X = X/=.

HomePage | RecentChanges | Preferences
Search: