diff -r ae5b1e3baf07 -r eb6514da85e2 exercises/solutions/sol01.tex
--- a/exercises/solutions/sol01.tex	Fri Apr 27 02:02:08 2012 +0200
+++ b/exercises/solutions/sol01.tex	Fri Apr 27 19:03:09 2012 +0200
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
 \usepackage{fullpage}
 \usepackage{mathtools}
 \usepackage[all]{xy}
-\addtolength{\voffset}{-25pt}
+\addtolength{\voffset}{-40pt}
 \title{CSP Exercise 01 Solution}
 \author{Eugen Sawin}
 \renewcommand{\familydefault}{\sfdefault}
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@
 (a) $R_{x,y} \bowtie S_{y,z} = \{(a,b,a),(a,b,c)\}$\\\\
 (b) $\sigma_{z=c}(R_{x,y} \bowtie S_{y,z}) = \{(a,b,c)\}$\\\\
 (c) $\pi_x(R_{x,y}) = \{(a)\}$\\\\
-(d) $R_{x,y} \circ S_{y,z} = \{(a,a),(a,c)\}$\\\\
+(d) $R_{x,y} \circ S_{y,z} = \{(a,a),(a,c)\}$
 
 \section*{Exercise 1.3}
 (a) By definition holds
@@ -56,15 +56,34 @@
   R \circ (S \cup T) &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in R \text{ and } (y,z) \in (S \cup T)\}\\
   R \circ S &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in R \text{ and } (y,z) \in S\}\\
   R \circ T &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in R \text{ and } (y,z) \in T\}
-\end{align}
+\end{align}\setcounter{equation}{0}\\
 The union of (2) and (3) gives us the set of all $(x,y) \in R$ with either $(y,z) \in S$ or $(y,z) \in T$, from which follows that $(y,z) \in (S \cup T)$, making it equal to (1). \qed\\\\
-(b) $-R$ was nowhere defined yet.\\\\
+(b) By definition holds
+\begin{align}
+  -R &= \{(x,y) \in X^2 \mid (x,y) \notin R\}\\
+  (-R)^{-1} &= \{(y,x) \in X^2 \mid (x,y) \in -R\}\\
+  -(R^{-1}) &= \{(x,y) \in X^2 \mid (x,y) \notin R^{-1}\}\\
+  -(R^{-1}) &= \{(x,y) \in X^2 \mid (y,x) \notin R\}
+\end{align}\setcounter{equation}{0}\\
+We've obtained (4) by applying the converse definition on (3). From the definition of $-R$ (1) follows that $(x,y) \in -R$ iff $(x,y) \notin R$, and therefore we see that (2) and (4) define equal sets. \qed\\\\
 (c) By definition holds
 \begin{align}
   (R \circ S)^{-1} &= \{(z,x) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in R \text{ and } (y,z) \in S\}\\
   S^{-1} \circ R^{-1} &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in S^{-1} \text{ and } (y,z) \in R^{-1}\}\\
   S^{-1} \circ R^{-1} &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (y,x) \in S \text{ and } (z,y) \in R\}
-\end{align}
-where (6) is (5) transformed by application of the definition of the converse of a relation. After some variable juggling we see that (4) and (6) are equal sets. \qed\\\\
-(d) Todo 
+\end{align}\setcounter{equation}{0}\\
+We've obtained (3) by applying the converse definition on (2). After some variable juggling we see that (1) and (3) define equal sets. \qed\\\\
+(d) By definition holds
+\begin{align}
+  R \circ S &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in R \text{ and } (y,z) \in S\}\\
+  (R \circ S) \cap T^{-1} &= (R \circ S) \cap \{(y,x) \in X^2 \mid (x,y) \in T\}\\
+  (R \circ S) \cap T^{-1} &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in R \text{ and } (y,z) \in S \text{ and } (z,x) \in T\}\\
+  (S \circ T) \cap R^{-1} &= \{(x,z) \in X^2 \mid \exists{y \in X}: (x,y) \in S \text{ and } (y,z) \in T \text{ and } (z,x) \in R\}
+\end{align}\\
+We've obtained (3) by directly applying intersection within the set comprehension of (2). It follows that\\
+\begin{align}
+  (R \circ S) \cap T^{-1} = \emptyset &\iff \forall{x,y,z \in X}: (x,y) \notin R \text{ or } (y,z) \notin S \text{ or } (z,x) \notin T\\
+  \text{ and } (S \circ T) \cap R^{-1} = \emptyset &\iff \forall{x,y,z \in X}: (x,y) \notin S \text{ or } (y,z) \notin T \text{ or } (z,x) \notin R
+\end{align}\\
+As we can see, the intersections form a ring-like relationship between the sets' tuples $(...,R, S, T, R,...)$. After some variable reordering, we see that both intersections are empty iff there is no ring-like relationship between any tuples of the three sets. \qed
 \end{document}