Re: help me understand this theorem
- From: "Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Mar 2005 12:01:21 -0800
susan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> So all they are saying is that the relation of nodes being connected
is
> reflexive, associtive and transitive?
Yes, though I don't normally think of a node as being
connected to itself.
The utility of equivalence relations is that that they
partition a set into equivalence "classes", subsets of
elements which all share the relationship with each
other, but not with any other element.
In the case of a graph, this author is saying that
the connected components of a graph can be thought of
as equivalence classes.
> So if there is a t-m path there must be a m-t path... if there is a
m-y
> path there must be a y-t path in any connected graph?
Yes.
> Is "R" just a random letter in this theorem... or is it going to be
> used over and over to talk about these kinds of relations?
That's up to the author. Any symbol can be used so long as
it is defined.
- Randy
.
- References:
- help me understand this theorem
- From: susan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: help me understand this theorem
- From: José Carlos Santos
- Re: help me understand this theorem
- From: susan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- help me understand this theorem
- Prev by Date: Re: An Interesting Problem
- Next by Date: Re: An Interesting Problem
- Previous by thread: Re: help me understand this theorem
- Next by thread: Re: Modern algebra
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
