in Set Theory & Algebra edited by
455 views
0 votes
0 votes

Argument: R2 is straight away eliminated. For R3, to satisfy Antisymmetric relation.. Say -2 and +2 satisfy it then +2 and -2 should not satisfy. But its not the case. Answer is given as C. Am I so blind that I couldn't figure out my mistake?

in Set Theory & Algebra edited by
455 views

1 comment

Answer is option D only , R3 is not an antisymetric relation .

0
0

4 Answers

0 votes
0 votes
answer should be d). only R1 is partial order. clearly R3 is not satisfying criterion of antisymmetric relation.
0 votes
0 votes
Option D will be right option.
0 votes
0 votes

Option D will be right option.

1 comment

r3 is not antisymmetric  here
0
0
0 votes
0 votes

answer would be D:

R1 is definitely partial order set (>= is classic example of poset)

R2 is clearly not reflexive therefore not partial order set

coming to R3 : we have to check whether it is antisymmetric or not: i.e (aRb and bRa) implies a=b

suppose we take +3 and -3 now (3)2 <= (-3)and (-3)2 <= (3)2 implies that 3=-3 which is false therefore it is not antisymmetric in nature following not a partial order.

Related questions