If $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$, then some $A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$?
$begingroup$
Is the following claim true?
If $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$, then some $A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$. Here $kappa$ is uncountable.
I'm interested in the particular case $kappa=c:=|mathbb{R}|$. In other words, if each $A_i$ has cardinality strictly less than $kappa$, can we deduce that $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality less than $kappa$?
I know very little cardinal arithmetic beyond the usual rules for sums and products. But I came across this in an analysis text, so I wonder whether it's true.
set-theory cardinals
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Is the following claim true?
If $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$, then some $A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$. Here $kappa$ is uncountable.
I'm interested in the particular case $kappa=c:=|mathbb{R}|$. In other words, if each $A_i$ has cardinality strictly less than $kappa$, can we deduce that $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality less than $kappa$?
I know very little cardinal arithmetic beyond the usual rules for sums and products. But I came across this in an analysis text, so I wonder whether it's true.
set-theory cardinals
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What text was this #*!% in?
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Jan 14 at 1:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Is the following claim true?
If $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$, then some $A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$. Here $kappa$ is uncountable.
I'm interested in the particular case $kappa=c:=|mathbb{R}|$. In other words, if each $A_i$ has cardinality strictly less than $kappa$, can we deduce that $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality less than $kappa$?
I know very little cardinal arithmetic beyond the usual rules for sums and products. But I came across this in an analysis text, so I wonder whether it's true.
set-theory cardinals
$endgroup$
Is the following claim true?
If $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$, then some $A_i$ has cardinality $kappa$. Here $kappa$ is uncountable.
I'm interested in the particular case $kappa=c:=|mathbb{R}|$. In other words, if each $A_i$ has cardinality strictly less than $kappa$, can we deduce that $bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i$ has cardinality less than $kappa$?
I know very little cardinal arithmetic beyond the usual rules for sums and products. But I came across this in an analysis text, so I wonder whether it's true.
set-theory cardinals
set-theory cardinals
asked Dec 31 '18 at 10:15
ColescuColescu
3,20011136
3,20011136
$begingroup$
What text was this #*!% in?
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Jan 14 at 1:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What text was this #*!% in?
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Jan 14 at 1:55
$begingroup$
What text was this #*!% in?
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Jan 14 at 1:55
$begingroup$
What text was this #*!% in?
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Jan 14 at 1:55
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Counter-example:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty omega_i right| = omega_omega$$
We have:
$$kappa = left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| le omega cdot sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i| = sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i|$$
So in order to conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$, we need $operatorname{cof}(kappa) = omega$, otherwise there are coutner-examples. For $kappa = mathfrak c$ though, you are lucky, since $operatorname{cof}(mathfrak c) > omega$, so you can always conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$.
Specializing on the case $kappa = mathfrak c$:
Let $|A_i| < mathfrak c$ for all $i$. By Konig's lemma:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| < left| prod_{i=1}^infty mathfrak c right| = mathfrak c^omega = 2^{omega cdot omega} = 2^omega = mathfrak c$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for answering! Could you please elaborate on why this is true for $c$? I don't understand your notation cof and all that.. (I'm practically blind about set theory)
$endgroup$
– Colescu
Dec 31 '18 at 10:25
$begingroup$
The last part is not exactly true in ZF, it is consistent that the reals are countable union of countable sets. In ZFC it is true(the proof that $mbox{cof}(2^λ)>λ$ require choice)
$endgroup$
– Holo
Dec 31 '18 at 10:33
$begingroup$
@Colescu I've included some explanation
$endgroup$
– Kenny Lau
Dec 31 '18 at 10:38
$begingroup$
It might be better to wriite $aleph_i$ instead of $omega_i$, just to make sure we''re using cardinal operations. (For example: $omega=aleph_0$; one thinks of $omega$ as an ordinal annd $aleph_0$ as a cardinal. So, with cardinal multiplication, $aleph_0aleph_0=aleph_0$. But if the notation $omegaomega$ is interppreted as an ordinal product then $omegaomeganeomega$.)
$endgroup$
– David C. Ullrich
Dec 31 '18 at 15:27
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057570%2fif-bigcup-i-1-infty-a-i-has-cardinality-kappa-then-some-a-i-has-card%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Counter-example:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty omega_i right| = omega_omega$$
We have:
$$kappa = left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| le omega cdot sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i| = sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i|$$
So in order to conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$, we need $operatorname{cof}(kappa) = omega$, otherwise there are coutner-examples. For $kappa = mathfrak c$ though, you are lucky, since $operatorname{cof}(mathfrak c) > omega$, so you can always conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$.
Specializing on the case $kappa = mathfrak c$:
Let $|A_i| < mathfrak c$ for all $i$. By Konig's lemma:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| < left| prod_{i=1}^infty mathfrak c right| = mathfrak c^omega = 2^{omega cdot omega} = 2^omega = mathfrak c$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for answering! Could you please elaborate on why this is true for $c$? I don't understand your notation cof and all that.. (I'm practically blind about set theory)
$endgroup$
– Colescu
Dec 31 '18 at 10:25
$begingroup$
The last part is not exactly true in ZF, it is consistent that the reals are countable union of countable sets. In ZFC it is true(the proof that $mbox{cof}(2^λ)>λ$ require choice)
$endgroup$
– Holo
Dec 31 '18 at 10:33
$begingroup$
@Colescu I've included some explanation
$endgroup$
– Kenny Lau
Dec 31 '18 at 10:38
$begingroup$
It might be better to wriite $aleph_i$ instead of $omega_i$, just to make sure we''re using cardinal operations. (For example: $omega=aleph_0$; one thinks of $omega$ as an ordinal annd $aleph_0$ as a cardinal. So, with cardinal multiplication, $aleph_0aleph_0=aleph_0$. But if the notation $omegaomega$ is interppreted as an ordinal product then $omegaomeganeomega$.)
$endgroup$
– David C. Ullrich
Dec 31 '18 at 15:27
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Counter-example:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty omega_i right| = omega_omega$$
We have:
$$kappa = left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| le omega cdot sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i| = sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i|$$
So in order to conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$, we need $operatorname{cof}(kappa) = omega$, otherwise there are coutner-examples. For $kappa = mathfrak c$ though, you are lucky, since $operatorname{cof}(mathfrak c) > omega$, so you can always conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$.
Specializing on the case $kappa = mathfrak c$:
Let $|A_i| < mathfrak c$ for all $i$. By Konig's lemma:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| < left| prod_{i=1}^infty mathfrak c right| = mathfrak c^omega = 2^{omega cdot omega} = 2^omega = mathfrak c$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks for answering! Could you please elaborate on why this is true for $c$? I don't understand your notation cof and all that.. (I'm practically blind about set theory)
$endgroup$
– Colescu
Dec 31 '18 at 10:25
$begingroup$
The last part is not exactly true in ZF, it is consistent that the reals are countable union of countable sets. In ZFC it is true(the proof that $mbox{cof}(2^λ)>λ$ require choice)
$endgroup$
– Holo
Dec 31 '18 at 10:33
$begingroup$
@Colescu I've included some explanation
$endgroup$
– Kenny Lau
Dec 31 '18 at 10:38
$begingroup$
It might be better to wriite $aleph_i$ instead of $omega_i$, just to make sure we''re using cardinal operations. (For example: $omega=aleph_0$; one thinks of $omega$ as an ordinal annd $aleph_0$ as a cardinal. So, with cardinal multiplication, $aleph_0aleph_0=aleph_0$. But if the notation $omegaomega$ is interppreted as an ordinal product then $omegaomeganeomega$.)
$endgroup$
– David C. Ullrich
Dec 31 '18 at 15:27
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Counter-example:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty omega_i right| = omega_omega$$
We have:
$$kappa = left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| le omega cdot sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i| = sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i|$$
So in order to conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$, we need $operatorname{cof}(kappa) = omega$, otherwise there are coutner-examples. For $kappa = mathfrak c$ though, you are lucky, since $operatorname{cof}(mathfrak c) > omega$, so you can always conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$.
Specializing on the case $kappa = mathfrak c$:
Let $|A_i| < mathfrak c$ for all $i$. By Konig's lemma:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| < left| prod_{i=1}^infty mathfrak c right| = mathfrak c^omega = 2^{omega cdot omega} = 2^omega = mathfrak c$$
$endgroup$
Counter-example:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty omega_i right| = omega_omega$$
We have:
$$kappa = left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| le omega cdot sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i| = sup_{i=1..infty} |A_i|$$
So in order to conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$, we need $operatorname{cof}(kappa) = omega$, otherwise there are coutner-examples. For $kappa = mathfrak c$ though, you are lucky, since $operatorname{cof}(mathfrak c) > omega$, so you can always conclude that $kappa = |A_i|$ for some $i$.
Specializing on the case $kappa = mathfrak c$:
Let $|A_i| < mathfrak c$ for all $i$. By Konig's lemma:
$$left| bigcup_{i=1}^infty A_i right| < left| prod_{i=1}^infty mathfrak c right| = mathfrak c^omega = 2^{omega cdot omega} = 2^omega = mathfrak c$$
edited Dec 31 '18 at 10:36
answered Dec 31 '18 at 10:19
Kenny LauKenny Lau
19.9k2160
19.9k2160
$begingroup$
Thanks for answering! Could you please elaborate on why this is true for $c$? I don't understand your notation cof and all that.. (I'm practically blind about set theory)
$endgroup$
– Colescu
Dec 31 '18 at 10:25
$begingroup$
The last part is not exactly true in ZF, it is consistent that the reals are countable union of countable sets. In ZFC it is true(the proof that $mbox{cof}(2^λ)>λ$ require choice)
$endgroup$
– Holo
Dec 31 '18 at 10:33
$begingroup$
@Colescu I've included some explanation
$endgroup$
– Kenny Lau
Dec 31 '18 at 10:38
$begingroup$
It might be better to wriite $aleph_i$ instead of $omega_i$, just to make sure we''re using cardinal operations. (For example: $omega=aleph_0$; one thinks of $omega$ as an ordinal annd $aleph_0$ as a cardinal. So, with cardinal multiplication, $aleph_0aleph_0=aleph_0$. But if the notation $omegaomega$ is interppreted as an ordinal product then $omegaomeganeomega$.)
$endgroup$
– David C. Ullrich
Dec 31 '18 at 15:27
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thanks for answering! Could you please elaborate on why this is true for $c$? I don't understand your notation cof and all that.. (I'm practically blind about set theory)
$endgroup$
– Colescu
Dec 31 '18 at 10:25
$begingroup$
The last part is not exactly true in ZF, it is consistent that the reals are countable union of countable sets. In ZFC it is true(the proof that $mbox{cof}(2^λ)>λ$ require choice)
$endgroup$
– Holo
Dec 31 '18 at 10:33
$begingroup$
@Colescu I've included some explanation
$endgroup$
– Kenny Lau
Dec 31 '18 at 10:38
$begingroup$
It might be better to wriite $aleph_i$ instead of $omega_i$, just to make sure we''re using cardinal operations. (For example: $omega=aleph_0$; one thinks of $omega$ as an ordinal annd $aleph_0$ as a cardinal. So, with cardinal multiplication, $aleph_0aleph_0=aleph_0$. But if the notation $omegaomega$ is interppreted as an ordinal product then $omegaomeganeomega$.)
$endgroup$
– David C. Ullrich
Dec 31 '18 at 15:27
$begingroup$
Thanks for answering! Could you please elaborate on why this is true for $c$? I don't understand your notation cof and all that.. (I'm practically blind about set theory)
$endgroup$
– Colescu
Dec 31 '18 at 10:25
$begingroup$
Thanks for answering! Could you please elaborate on why this is true for $c$? I don't understand your notation cof and all that.. (I'm practically blind about set theory)
$endgroup$
– Colescu
Dec 31 '18 at 10:25
$begingroup$
The last part is not exactly true in ZF, it is consistent that the reals are countable union of countable sets. In ZFC it is true(the proof that $mbox{cof}(2^λ)>λ$ require choice)
$endgroup$
– Holo
Dec 31 '18 at 10:33
$begingroup$
The last part is not exactly true in ZF, it is consistent that the reals are countable union of countable sets. In ZFC it is true(the proof that $mbox{cof}(2^λ)>λ$ require choice)
$endgroup$
– Holo
Dec 31 '18 at 10:33
$begingroup$
@Colescu I've included some explanation
$endgroup$
– Kenny Lau
Dec 31 '18 at 10:38
$begingroup$
@Colescu I've included some explanation
$endgroup$
– Kenny Lau
Dec 31 '18 at 10:38
$begingroup$
It might be better to wriite $aleph_i$ instead of $omega_i$, just to make sure we''re using cardinal operations. (For example: $omega=aleph_0$; one thinks of $omega$ as an ordinal annd $aleph_0$ as a cardinal. So, with cardinal multiplication, $aleph_0aleph_0=aleph_0$. But if the notation $omegaomega$ is interppreted as an ordinal product then $omegaomeganeomega$.)
$endgroup$
– David C. Ullrich
Dec 31 '18 at 15:27
$begingroup$
It might be better to wriite $aleph_i$ instead of $omega_i$, just to make sure we''re using cardinal operations. (For example: $omega=aleph_0$; one thinks of $omega$ as an ordinal annd $aleph_0$ as a cardinal. So, with cardinal multiplication, $aleph_0aleph_0=aleph_0$. But if the notation $omegaomega$ is interppreted as an ordinal product then $omegaomeganeomega$.)
$endgroup$
– David C. Ullrich
Dec 31 '18 at 15:27
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057570%2fif-bigcup-i-1-infty-a-i-has-cardinality-kappa-then-some-a-i-has-card%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
What text was this #*!% in?
$endgroup$
– DanielWainfleet
Jan 14 at 1:55