Determine if the following is an equivalence relation

In summary, the relationship C on a group G, where aCb iff ab=ba, is an equivalence relation in an Abelian group, with the equivalence class being the entire group. However, it is not an equivalence relation in a non-Abelian group as there exist elements that do not commute and therefore do not fulfill the transitive condition.
  • #1
polarbears
23
0

Homework Statement


Determined if the following is an equivalence relation, if so describe the equivalence class.
The relationship [tex]C[/tex] on a group [tex]G[/tex], where [tex]aCb[/tex] iff [tex]ab=ba[/tex]


Homework Equations




The Attempt at a Solution


So i know there's 3 things to check: reflexive condition, symmetric condition, and the transitive condition.
The 1st two passed just by inspection, but I'm really stuck on the last one.
So if [tex]ab=ba[/tex] and [tex]bd=db[/tex] on a group [tex]G[/tex]does that imply [tex]ad=da[/tex]? That's how i set it up but I can't find how to (dis)prove it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I can't come up with any justification of why this statement wouldn't be true, but I'm not having any success, either. I'll keep gnawing on it for a while.
 
  • #3
with no general way to shift the order of a & d in a combined multiplication, I'm thinking a counter example may be the way to go, with the two element interchange operations of permutation groups a good place to start...
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Would this work?
Let a,b,d exist in a non-Abelian group and then let b be the identity element.
then ab=ba and bd=db just reduce to a=a and d=d but then ad does not have to equal da since the group is not Abelian
 
  • #5
yeah i think that is reasonable, i think the identity element always commutes, so is equivalent to everything, and in a non-abelian group there exist elements that don't commute, i'd just be a little clear with the difference between = vs ~ as well
 
  • #6
the counter example i was thinking of was the permutation group of 5 elements with
b = (12)
a = (34)
d = (45)

which works just as well with b = ()
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Old thread but I think I'm still not done with this problem

So I've establish that this is not an equivalence relationship in a non-abelian group, but it still works in an abelian group. So would the equivalence class be sets of elements in an Abelian group?

I'm still trying to grasp this idea of equivalence class
 
  • #8
Yes, the equivalence class would be the entire group because all the elements commute with all the other elements and are therefore related.
 

FAQ: Determine if the following is an equivalence relation

What is an equivalence relation?

An equivalence relation is a mathematical concept that describes a relationship between elements of a set. It is a binary relation that is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.

What does it mean for a relation to be reflexive?

A relation is reflexive if every element in the set is related to itself. In other words, for any element x in the set, (x,x) must be a part of the relation.

What does it mean for a relation to be symmetric?

A relation is symmetric if for any two elements x and y in the set, if (x,y) is a part of the relation, then (y,x) must also be a part of the relation. In other words, if x is related to y, then y must also be related to x.

What does it mean for a relation to be transitive?

A relation is transitive if for any three elements x, y, and z in the set, if (x,y) and (y,z) are both part of the relation, then (x,z) must also be a part of the relation. In other words, if x is related to y and y is related to z, then x must also be related to z.

How can I determine if a relation is an equivalence relation?

To determine if a relation is an equivalence relation, you must check if it is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive. If it satisfies all three properties, then it is an equivalence relation. If it fails to satisfy any one of the properties, then it is not an equivalence relation.

Similar threads

Back
Top