Is the Number of Binary Sequences Countable or Uncountable?

  • Thread starter Kevin_Axion
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Argument
In summary, the conversation discusses the countability of an infinite sequence of binary sequences. It is shown that the sequence is countable because each element can be mapped to a natural number. However, it is also proven that there exists a unique sequence s_0 that is not included in the original list, indicating that the number of binary sequences is uncountable.
  • #1
Kevin_Axion
913
2
I was reading this up on Wiki so I'll just give a quick overview and then ask my question.

Let [itex]\cal{S}[/itex] be an infinite sequence of sequences [itex](s_1,\; s_2,\: s_3,...,\; s_n)[/itex] such that each [itex]s_i[/itex] contains an infinite amount of elements that are either a [itex]0[/itex] or a [itex]1[/itex].

The sequence [itex]\cal{S}[/itex] is countable since every element belonging to the sequence can be mapped to [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex] i.e it is bijective.

Now for the sake of simplifying, let [itex]n[/itex] represent the sequence number and [itex]m[/itex] be the element of the sequence.

For example let [itex]s_1 = (1,\; 0,\; 0,\; 1,... )[/itex] then [itex]s_{1,\; 1} = 1[/itex]

Let there exist a sequence [itex]s_0[/itex] such that the first element of [itex]s_0[/itex] is [itex]0[/itex] if the first element of the first sequence i.e [itex]s_{1,\; 1}[/itex] in [itex]\cal{S}[/itex] is [itex]1[/itex] otherwise let [itex]s_{0, 1}[/itex] be [itex]1[/itex]. This rule applies for all elements of [itex]s_0[/itex] such that any [itex]s_{0,\; n} \neq s_{n,\; n}[/itex]. This proves that [itex]s_0[/itex] is unique but how does it prove it's uncountable? I mean if [itex]n[/itex] represents the element number of the sequence [itex]s_0[/itex] and every [itex]n[/itex] can be mapped to a subset of [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex] isn't it countable?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Kevin_Axion said:
I was reading this up on Wiki so I'll just give a quick overview and then ask my question.

Let [itex]\cal{S}[/itex] be an infinite sequence of sequences [itex]s_1,\; s_2,\: s_3,...,\; s_n[/itex] such that each [itex]s_i[/itex] contains an infinite amount of elements that are either a [itex]0[/itex] or a [itex]1[/itex].

The sequence [itex]\cal{S}[/itex] is countable since every element belonging to the sequence can be mapped to [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex] i.e it is bijective.

Now for the sake of simplifying, let [itex]n[/itex] represent the sequence number and
[itex]m[/itex] be the element of the sequence.

For example let [itex]s_1 = (1,\; 0,\; 0,\; 1,... )[/itex] then [itex]s_{1,\; 1} = 1[/itex]

Let there exist a sequence [itex]s_0[/itex] such that the first element of [itex]s_0[/itex] is [itex]0[/itex] if the first element of the first sequence i.e [itex]s_{1,\; 1}[/itex] in [itex]\cal{S}[/itex] is [itex]1[/itex] otherwise let [itex]s_{0, 1}[/itex] be [itex]1[/itex]. This rule applies for all elements of [itex]s_0[/itex] such that any [itex]s_{0,\; n} \neq s_{n,\; n}[/itex]. This proves that [itex]s_0[/itex] is unique but how does it prove it's uncountable? I mean [itex]n[/itex] represents the element number of the sequence [itex]s_0[/itex] and every [itex]n[/itex] can be mapped to a subset of [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex].

You just showed that [itex]s_0[/itex] is not any [itex]s_i[/itex] for i > 0. So your original list does not contain ALL of the possible binary sequences. But since your original list S was arbitrary, that shows there is no list that contains all binary sequences. So the number of binary sequences is uncountable.
 
  • #3
SteveL27 said:
You just showed that [itex]s_0[/itex] is not any [itex]s_i[/itex] for i > 0. So your original list does not contain ALL of the possible binary sequences. But since your original list S was arbitrary, that shows there is no list that contains all binary sequences. So the number of binary sequences is uncountable.

Oh, very good. I think I read the conclusion wrong, I get it now. Thanks!
 

1. What is Cantor's Diagonal Argument?

Cantor's Diagonal Argument, also known as the Cantor's Diagonalization Argument, is a mathematical proof developed by German mathematician Georg Cantor in 1891. It is used to show that there are infinite sets that cannot be put into one-to-one correspondence with each other.

2. How does Cantor's Diagonal Argument work?

The argument works by constructing a list of elements in a given set and then showing that there is always a new element that can be created by changing the diagonal of the list. This new element cannot be found in the original list, proving that the set is larger than the list and cannot be counted.

3. What is the importance of Cantor's Diagonal Argument?

Cantor's Diagonal Argument is important because it provided a way to compare the sizes of different infinite sets. It revolutionized the field of mathematics and led to the development of new branches such as set theory and transfinite arithmetic.

4. What are some examples of sets that Cantor's Diagonal Argument applies to?

Cantor's Diagonal Argument applies to any set that is infinite and can be listed, such as the set of all natural numbers, real numbers, and even the set of all possible computer programs. It can also be applied to the set of all possible combinations of letters or numbers.

5. Are there any criticisms or counterarguments to Cantor's Diagonal Argument?

There have been some criticisms and counterarguments to Cantor's Diagonal Argument, such as the claim that it only applies to certain types of infinite sets and not all of them. However, the argument is widely accepted and has been extensively studied and applied in mathematics.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
27
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
370
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
15
Views
1K
Back
Top