22.2. Introduction

Hello everyone, welcome to this lecture on equivalence relations and partitions.

Just to recap in the last lecture we introduced the notion of equivalence relation and equivalence classes. In this lecture, we will continue the discussion on equivalence relations and classes. And we will introduce the notion of partition of a set and we will see the relationship between equivalence classes and partitions.

This chunk serves as an introduction to the lecture, greeting the audience and presenting the main topics. It begins by recapping the previous lecture's focus on equivalence relations and equivalence classes. It sets the stage for the current discussion by stating that the lecture will expand on these topics and introduce the concept of the partition of a set, while also exploring how equivalence classes relate to partitions.

Imagine giving a presentation at a conference; you start with a warm welcome to the audience, reminding them of what was discussed in the previous session. You then outline what you, as the presenter, will cover next—this is similar to what the speaker does in this section.

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.

In this chunk, the speaker defines what a partition of a set is. A partition of a set C is described as a collection of subsets of C, characterized by two main properties: the subsets must be non-empty and pairwise disjoint, which means that no two subsets can share elements. Furthermore, when the subsets are combined (union), they must reconstruct the original set C completely without any missing elements.

Think of a pizza divided into several slices. Each slice represents a non-empty part of the pizza (set C), and together, all the slices (subsets) form the full pizza again. No matter how you arrange the slices on the table, if all are present, they perfectly reconstruct the entire pizza.

So intuitively, say for example, you have the map of India you can say that the various states of India partition the entire country India into various subsets such that there is no intersection among the states here. So, in that sense, I am just trying to find out some subsets of the set C such that there should not be any overlap among those subsets and if I take the union of all those subsets I should get back the original set C, there should not be any element of C which is missing.

This chunk gives an analogy for better understanding. The speaker uses the map of India as an example, where each state represents a different subset of the set C. The key point is that states are distinct and do not overlap, ensuring that if we were to combine all the states (union), we'd have a complete representation of the country (original set C). This analogy clarifies what it means to partition a set in a basic and relatable way.

You can visualize this like sorting a box of assorted toys by categories: one box for cars, another for dolls, and so on. Each category (or state) is separate (no overlap), and when you put all the categorized toys together back into one big box, you have all your toys (the entire set C) accounted for.

So, more formally the requirements here are the following. Each subset ≠ ∅ that means each subset should have at least one element. They should be pairwise disjoint. That means if I take any A, B then A ∩ B = ∅ and A ∪ … ∪ A = C, So, one trivial partition of the set C is the set C itself.

In this chunk, the speaker outlines the formal requirements for a partition. First, each subset must not be empty. This indicates that every subset must contain at least one element. Second, the subsets must be pairwise disjoint, meaning that any two different subsets do not share any elements (the intersection is empty). Lastly, the union of all subsets must reconstruct the original set C. The speaker also points out that one trivial example of a partition is the set C itself, considered as one whole subset.

Imagine organizing a collection of books in a library. Each shelf represents a subset, which must have at least one book (non-empty), and each shelf should only hold different genres without mixing (pairwise disjoint). All shelves together must hold all books in the library (the union gives the original collection).

--