Answer:
isn't an equivalence relation. It is reflexive but neither symmetric nor transitive.
Step-by-step explanation:
Let
denote a set of elements.
would denote the set of all ordered pairs of elements of
.
For example, with
,
and
are both members of
. However,
because the pairs are ordered.
A relation
on
is a subset of
. For any two elements
,
if and only if the ordered pair
is in
.
A relation
on set
is an equivalence relation if it satisfies the following:
- Reflexivity: for any
, the relation
needs to ensure that
(that is:
.)
- Symmetry: for any
,
if and only if
. In other words, either both
and
are in
, or neither is in
.
- Transitivity: for any
, if
and
, then
. In other words, if
and
are both in
, then
also needs to be in
.
The relation
(on
) in this question is indeed reflexive.
,
, and
(one pair for each element of
) are all elements of
.
isn't symmetric.
but
(the pairs in
are all ordered.) In other words,
isn't equivalent to
under
even though
.
Neither is
transitive.
and
. However,
. In other words, under relation
,
and
does not imply
.
Answer:
They let you know the number of numbers there are/will be.
Step-by-step explanation:
Mono, being one, means there will only be one number is the equation.
Bi, being two, means there will be two numbers in the equation.
and tri, being three, means there are three numbers in the equation.
Yes it is correct because you would multiply 30 by 7 which equals 210 + the extra 20 dollars / 50 dollars (idk).. she will have more than enough though
Answer:
see below:
Step-by-step explanation:
2y–6=0
a. slope intercept form using y = mx + b
y = 6/2
y = 3
b. slope: use the slope intercept form: y = mx + b
slope = m = 0
c. y-intercept = (0,3)
Answer:
<h2>

</h2>
Explanation;
Associated line with this equation is:
y=mx+c
when,
X=0
y=-4
so, c=-4
X=1
y=-1


Inequality representated by graph:

Hope this helps...
Good luck on your assignment...