Timeline for Why is one relation transitive but the other is not?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 3, 2016 at 11:39 | comment | added | Jik | As @EricWofsey points out in his answer, the first relation is not an equivalence relation. Unless the problem calls it that, I'd edit that term out, because at least I had a hard time reading this problem as I assumed that the first relation indeed is an equivalence relation (didn't check it through during the first read) and thought you had confused "first example" and "second example" later. | |
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:52 | history | edited | Roland | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 53 characters in body |
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:48 | history | edited | Eric Wofsey | CC BY-SA 3.0 | edited tags; edited title |
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:42 | answer | added | Graham Kemp | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:30 | answer | added | Ove Ahlman | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:29 | answer | added | Eric Wofsey | timeline score: 9 | |
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:22 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:32 | |||||
| Mar 2, 2016 at 7:18 | history | asked | user3023185 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |