Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    tmthomp3's Avatar
    tmthomp3 Posts: 1, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #1

    Nov 14, 2006, 09:57 PM
    Discrete Mathematics
    Proof of Reflexivity

    suppose m is any integer
    now m-m=0
    but 3/0
    since 0=3(0)
    so 3/ (m-m)
    hence by definition n of R, mRn

    can anyone explain to me the logic behind following these steps to come up with this answer... per se... can anyone explain why the teacher subtracted (m-m) and made it the denominator in the aforementioned problem.
    Capuchin's Avatar
    Capuchin Posts: 5,255, Reputation: 656
    Uber Member
     
    #2

    Nov 15, 2006, 02:59 AM
    I can't say that this makes any sense to me, care to clarify?

    "but 3/0" isn't much of a valid argument as far as I can see?
    asterisk_man's Avatar
    asterisk_man Posts: 476, Reputation: 32
    Full Member
     
    #3

    Nov 15, 2006, 12:01 PM
    Are you sure you aren't missing some of what was presented to you? I agree with Capuchin that this doesn't make a lot of sense to me as you have written it.

    I believe the teacher is trying to prove that m=m.
    Beyond that I don't have much more to give.
    worthbeads's Avatar
    worthbeads Posts: 538, Reputation: 45
    Senior Member
     
    #4

    Nov 16, 2006, 03:53 PM
    m=m anyway regardless, as proven by the reflexive property.
    asterisk_man's Avatar
    asterisk_man Posts: 476, Reputation: 32
    Full Member
     
    #5

    Nov 17, 2006, 11:10 AM
    My impression was that this was supposed to be a proof that the reflexive property holds true for integers.
    worthbeads's Avatar
    worthbeads Posts: 538, Reputation: 45
    Senior Member
     
    #6

    Nov 19, 2006, 02:21 PM
    I agree with you. But the reflexive property just seems like a no brainer.
    Anna26's Avatar
    Anna26 Posts: 12, Reputation: 3
    New Member
     
    #7

    Nov 19, 2006, 03:52 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tmthomp3
    Proof of Reflexivity

    suppose m is any integer
    now m-m=0
    but 3/0
    since 0=3(0)
    so 3/ (m-m)
    hence by definition n of R, mRn

    can anyone explain to me the logic behind following these steps to come up with this answer...per se...can anyone explain why the teacher subtracted (m-m) and made it the denominator int he aforementioned problem.
    My guess is the following: perhaps the teacher defined R earlier by

    mRn if m-n is divisible by 3.


    Or "m is related to n by R if the difference m-n is divisible by 3"
    "Reflexivity" means that every element is related by R with itself. (It's one of the properties of an equivalence relation). So to prove reflexivity, the teacher needs to prove that for any integer mRm, or in other words that
    3 divides (m-m). But (m-m) is just zero, so 3 divides it in a kind of trivial way. So that's done.

    I think the tricky bit here is that what the teacher is proving is so simple that it seems strange. But it's helpful to be very clear when you start to prove things, and check of everything precisely.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Discrete Mathematics Homework Help [ 1 Answers ]

The Epidemic Problem A certain flu has a one day infection period and after that a person is immune to the flu. Nine people live on an isolated island. One person catches the flu and randomly contacts one other person while playing golf during her infection period. The second person is infected...

Mathematics [ 2 Answers ]

Add the following, using the lowest common denominator: 2/3+1/6 = 1/2+1/8 = 2/3+1/4 = 1/3+5/12+1/6= 1/10+1/4+3/5= 1/6+2/3+2/9= Subtract the following: 2/3-1/3= 6/7-3/7= 11/15-7/15 Subtract the following using the lowest common denominator: 3/4-1/2= 7/9-1/3= 5/6-1/4= Multiply...


View more questions Search