22.4.2.2. Example with Subset Construction

So, let us start with the definition of a partition of a set. So, imagine you are given a set C which may be finite or it may be infinite. Now, what is the partition of this set C? The partition here is basically a collection of pairwise disjoint, non-empty subsets say m subsets of C which should be pairwise disjoint such that if you take their union, you should get back the original set C.

A partition of a set is like dividing a whole pie into slices where each slice is a non-overlapping piece. This means that if you have a set, you can create groups (subsets) from that set so that these groups do not share any members (pairwise disjoint) and when combined again, they recreate the original set without any members left out.

Think of a jigsaw puzzle. Each piece represents a non-empty subset (slice), and when all pieces are combined (union), they form the complete picture (original set). If one piece is missing, the picture is incomplete, just like a set partition requires all its elements to be present.

More formally the requirements here are the following. Each subset must not be empty, they should be pairwise disjoint, and the union must return the original set C. A trivial partition of the set C is the set C itself... So, there might be various ways of partitioning your set; it is not a unique way of partitioning a set.

For a valid partition, it's essential that each group contains at least one element (non-empty), that no two groups share elements (pairwise disjoint), and that when combined again, no elements of the original set are lost. An example of a trivial partition is taking the entire set as one piece. There are many other ways you can piece together the set by choosing different groupings.

Imagine sorting your collection of books by genre. For example, you might have a shelf for mystery, one for science fiction, and one for history. Each genre must have at least one book (non-empty). Each shelf doesn’t have books from other genres (pairwise disjoint). Together all these shelves represent your total collection (union).

Now what we now want to establish here is a very interesting relationship between equivalence from an equivalence relation to the partition of a set. So, imagine you are given a set C consisting of n elements. Now what I can prove here is that if R is an equivalence relation over the set C and if the equivalence classes which I can form with respect to the relation R are C1,…,Cm. Then my claim here is that the equivalence classes C1,…,Cm constitutes a partition of the set C.

This section explains a key relationship: any equivalence relation you create can be used to form partitions. An equivalence relation organizes elements into groups called equivalence classes, where all members are related in some way. The different equivalence classes completely cover the original set without overlaps, fulfilling the requirements of a partition.

Consider a classroom where students are grouped by their grades. Each group consists of students who scored within a similar range (equivalence classes). Together, every student in the class fits into one of these groups, making it a perfect partition of the classroom by grades.

To establish the partition properties through equivalence classes, we need to verify three requirements: Each subset must be non-empty (satisfied due to each class having at least one element), the union of the subsets must equal C (since each original element belongs to one class), and the subsets must be pairwise disjoint (two classes cannot share elements).

By showing these properties, you confirm that equivalence classes derived from an equivalence relation can indeed serve as valid partitions of the set. Each class represents a distinct grouping of related elements, which can be summed back to recreate the original set without losing any elements or overlapping the classes.

Imagine sorting students into teams for a project where each team consists of students with similar skills. Each team (class) has at least one student (non-empty), when all students are grouped correctly none are left out (union equals original set), and no one can be in two teams at the same time (pairwise disjoint).

Now, I can prove the property in the reverse direction as well. What do I mean by that? I claim here that you give me any partition of a set C, say you give me a collection of m subsets which constitute a partition of the set C. Then I can give you an equivalence relation R whose equivalence classes will be the subsets you have given me in the partition.

This part of the section presents the idea that not only can you derive partitions from equivalence relations, but you can also do the opposite. If you have already defined a partition, you can establish an equivalence relation that groups elements from the same partition subset. This means you can create connections among elements based on their common affinity as indicated by the partition.

If you have sorted fruits into baskets—apples in one, bananas in another—you can define an equivalence relation where two fruits are related if they belong to the same basket. This way, the grouping directly translates into an equivalence situation based on their respective categories.

--