Question:medium

Consider the relations $R_1$ and $R_2$ defined as \[a R_1 b \iff a^2 + b^2 = 1 \quad \text{for all } a, b \in \mathbb{R},\]and \[(a, b) R_2 (c, d) \iff a + d = b + c \quad \text{for all } (a, b), (c, d) \in \mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}.\]Then:

Updated On: Jan 14, 2026
  • Only R1 is an equivalence relation
  • Only R2 is an equivalence relation
  • R1 and R2 both are equivalence relations
  • Neither R1 nor R2 is an equivalence relation
Show Solution

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

To determine if \( R_1 \) and \( R_2 \) are equivalence relations, we will verify reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity.

Relation \( R_1 \):

  • Reflexivity: For \( a R_1 a \), we require \( a^2 + a^2 = 1 \), which simplifies to \( 2a^2 = 1 \). This condition is not met for all \( a \in \mathbb{R} \), thus \( R_1 \) is not reflexive.
  • Symmetry: Assume \( a R_1 b \), meaning \( a^2 + b^2 = 1 \). Since \( a^2 + b^2 = 1 \) implies \( b^2 + a^2 = 1 \), it follows that \( b R_1 a \). Therefore, \( R_1 \) is symmetric.
  • Transitivity: If \( a R_1 b \) and \( b R_1 c \), then \( a^2 + b^2 = 1 \) and \( b^2 + c^2 = 1 \). Summing these equations yields \( a^2 + 2b^2 + c^2 = 2 \). This does not necessarily imply \( a^2 + c^2 = 1 \) unless \( b^2 = 0 \), which is not universally true for all \( a, b, c \). Consequently, \( R_1 \) is not transitive.

As \( R_1 \) fails reflexivity and transitivity, it is not an equivalence relation.

Relation \( R_2 \):

  • Reflexivity: For \( (a, b) R_2 (a, b) \), we need \( a + b = b + a \). This equality holds for all \( (a, b) \in \mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N} \), confirming \( R_2 \) is reflexive.
  • Symmetry: If \( (a, b) R_2 (c, d) \), then \( a + d = b + c \). Rearranging this gives \( c + b = d + a \), which means \( (c, d) R_2 (a, b) \). Thus, \( R_2 \) is symmetric.
  • Transitivity: Let \( (a, b) R_2 (c, d) \) and \( (c, d) R_2 (e, f) \). This implies \( a + d = b + c \) and \( c + f = d + e \). Adding these two equations results in \( a + f = b + e \). This shows that \( (a, b) R_2 (e, f) \), proving \( R_2 \) is transitive.

Since \( R_2 \) exhibits reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity, it is an equivalence relation.

Based on these findings, the correct conclusion is: Only \( R_2 \) is an equivalence relation.

Was this answer helpful?
0