Please define "transitive" relation.Could first-cousin relationships be considered "transitive"?
Now you tell me:A transitive relation: If xRy and yRz, then xRz.
Yes, I think it is. However, I'm trying to double-check. Probably because I'm, slightly, confused in regard to the exact definition of "first cousin".Now you tell me:
Could first-cousin relationships be considered "transitive"?
"first cousin" could have a modifier - maternal or paternal.Yes, I think it is. However, I'm trying to double-check. Probably because I'm, slightly, confused in regard to the exact definition of "first cousin".
To clarify, what you are doing here is not "double-checking"; it is asking for an answer. What you need to check is not the answer, but your reasoning, which is what you are supposed to be learning. To help you check that, we need to see your reasoning; all you've shown of that is "I think so". Please tell us why you think so! Our goal is to help you be confident of your own reasoning, so you won't have to ask other people so much.What if the definition, simply, states "their parents are siblings".. without the gender modifier? Transitive, I'm guessing?
Honestly, I'm an obsessive double-checker. Math terrifies me!
Just because the examples you look at do not go against the transitive property does not mean that you have the transitive property. Possibly you have not looked at all examples. Your examples so far only looked at the children of brothers and sisters.What I meant is that I'm double-checking (or trying to) my reasoning. Not everyone is good at putting things into words, particularly when the subject is new and they have a disability.
When I stated "their parents are siblings (without the gender modifier)", I was thinking of an example like the following:
A, B and C are siblings.
A has a daughter d
B has a son e
C has a daughter f
dRe, eRf and dRf, making it a transitive relation. I may or may not be correct.
Just because the examples you look at do not go against the transitive property does not mean that you have the transitive property. Possibly you have not looked at all examples. Your examples so far only looked at the children of brothers and sisters.
Suppose John has a brother Jack and Susan has a brother Juan.
Now Susan marries Jack.
Susan and Jack have a child named Julio
John has a son named Bill and Juan has a daughter named Jill.
Julio and Bill are 1st cousins. Julio and Jill are 1st cousins.
Are Bill and Jill 1st Cousins?
What if the definition, simply, states "their parents are siblings".. without the gender modifier? Transitive, I'm guessing?
Honestly, I'm an obsessive double-checker. Math terrifies me!
The modifier I was referring to is the "branch of the family".What if the definition, simply, states "their parents are siblings".. without the gender modifier? Transitive, I'm guessing?
Honestly, I'm an obsessive double-checker. Math terrifies me!
We are volunteers here - and each of us want to help "elevate" the level of knowledge in the student body. Nobody here - at least in this discussion has shown any "haughty" attitude. We want students to find the answer as opposed to given to them. Nobody - I mean nobody has any illusion of self-greatness.It wouldn't kill some people to react in a more considerate/compassionate matter, without making assumptions about others.
I understand several members possess remarkable mathematical acumen. However, that doesn't justify an elitist or haughty attitude .
I'm sure there are other walks of life they're yet to master, and would hate being treated similarly when approached as a complete beginner.
It takes courage to display humility, particularly when the Internet grows a tendency to grant illusions of greatness.