Total, transitive, not anti-symmetric orderings

  • Thread starter noowutah
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses total orders on a multi-dimensional, real-numbered vector space X. These orders are usually transitive, total, and antisymmetric, but not necessarily. To prove antisymmetry, further conditions must be met. The claim is made that all transitive, total, not-antisymmetric orders are of a certain type, where only one dimension is considered. The speaker asks for help formalizing and proving this claim, but later retracts it as being incorrect.
  • #1
noowutah
57
3
I have a total order on a multi-dimensional, real-numbered vector space [itex]X[/itex]. This means that for any vectors [itex]x,y\in{}X[/itex] either [itex]xRy[/itex] or [itex]yRx[/itex]. Total orders are usually transitive, total, and antisymmetric (if [itex]xRy[/itex] and [itex]yRx[/itex] then [itex]x=y[/itex]), but this one is not necessarily antisymmetric, it is only transitive and total. Which further conditions do I need to prove that it is antisymmetric, ie. [itex]xRy[/itex] and [itex]yRx[/itex] imply [itex]x=y[/itex] just based on the fact that the ordering is total and transitive? One example of a transitive, total ordering which is not antisymmetric is one that uses only one coordinate of the vector and the usual less than ([itex]\geq[/itex]) or greater than ([itex]\leq[/itex]) relations: [itex]xRy[/itex] if and only if [itex]x_{i}>y_{i}[/itex] for some fixed [itex]i[/itex], and we ignore all other coordinates, all [itex]x_{j}[/itex] for [itex]j\neq{}i[/itex]. I have a hunch that ALL transitive, total orderings that are not antisymmetric are of this type. How could I formalize and prove this claim?

The claim, in other words, is that the only transitive, total, not-antisymmetric orderings [itex]R[/itex] of a [itex]n[/itex]-dimensional, real-numbered vector space are those which only consider one dimension and disregard the others. Let [itex]R[/itex] be a such an ordering. Then there exists a transitive, total, antisymmetric ordering [itex]R'[/itex] of the real numbers such that for a fixed [itex]k\in\{1,\ldots,n\}[/itex] [itex]xRy[/itex] if and only if [itex]x_{k}R'y_{k}[/itex]. How would I prove this (and is it correct)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Taking myself out of the NR category. Don't bother answering this one. The claim is patently false and needs to be re-articulated. Sorry.
 

Related to Total, transitive, not anti-symmetric orderings

1. What is a total ordering?

A total ordering is a relationship between elements in a set where every pair of elements can be compared and are either equal or one is greater than the other. This means that for any two elements, one will always come before or after the other in the ordering.

2. What is a transitive ordering?

A transitive ordering is a relationship between elements in a set where if element A is before element B, and element B is before element C, then element A must also be before element C. This ensures that the ordering is consistent and follows a logical progression.

3. What does it mean for an ordering to be not anti-symmetric?

An ordering is not anti-symmetric if there exists elements A and B where A is before B and B is also before A. In other words, there are two elements that are both greater than and less than each other in the ordering.

4. How are total, transitive, and not anti-symmetric orderings used in scientific research?

These types of orderings are commonly used in fields such as mathematics, computer science, and economics to organize and compare data. They are also important in developing algorithms and making logical deductions in scientific experiments.

5. Can a total, transitive, not anti-symmetric ordering exist in the real world?

While these types of orderings are often used in theoretical and abstract contexts, they can also be applied in real-world scenarios. For example, in a ranking system for sports teams, a total ordering would be used to determine the overall standings, while a transitive ordering would ensure that teams are ranked consistently based on their performance against each other. Not anti-symmetric ordering could also occur in real-world situations, such as in social hierarchies where individuals may have varying degrees of power and influence over each other.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
719
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top