Talk:Reflexive Circular Relation is Equivalence

Nice result - worth putting in a parallel result that it goes the other way? --prime mover (talk) 20:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * For some originality it could perhaps use your work on logic or LF's work on duality. Although we can't go about naming what we please I would like to use the words clockwise and anticlockwise (or counterclockwise) to distinguish between them. --Jshflynn (talk) 21:52, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Clockwise and anticlockwise? You've completely lost me there. References? --prime mover (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah I get you now. You mean Reflexive and Circular Iff Equivalence. In my statement I was referring to visualising a circular relation as being "clockwise" and its inverse being "anticlockwise" but I see that is quite different from what you were saying. --Jshflynn (talk) 22:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)