How can we represent the infinite powerset of a set?"

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Organic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    List
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of the infinite powerset of a set, particularly focusing on the powerset of natural numbers and its implications in set theory. Participants explore various representations, including binary forms and Cantor's function, while addressing foundational concepts in set theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants present representations of finite powersets, such as P(2) and P(3), and extend the discussion to P(aleph0) with claims about bijections between N and R.
  • One participant introduces Cantor's function, suggesting that it can yield numbers not included in the initial list, raising concerns about logical implications.
  • There is a contention regarding the identification of the empty set and the number zero, with some arguing that they are distinct while others suggest they can be considered equivalent in certain contexts.
  • Participants discuss the nature of sequences in relation to infinite digits, with one arguing that sequences indexed by integers cannot be infinite in the context presented.
  • There are corrections regarding the notation used for powersets, with emphasis on the need for proper set notation rather than numerical representations.
  • Some participants challenge the interpretation of open intervals and their relevance to the discussion, calling for clarification on the terms used.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on foundational concepts in set theory, such as the nature of the empty set, the representation of infinite sequences, and the validity of certain notations. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives present.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about set representations, the definitions of sequences, and the implications of Cantor's function. Some mathematical steps and notations remain unclear or contested.

Organic
Messages
1,223
Reaction score
0
Let us check these lists.


P(2) = {{},{0},{1},{0,1}} = 2^2 = 4

and also can be represented as:

00
01
10
11


P(3) = {{},{0},{1},{2},{0,1},{0,2},{1,2},{0,1,2}} = 2^3 = 8

and also can be represented as:

000
001
010
011
100
101
110
111


...


P(aleph0) = 2^aleph0 = |R|

and also can be represented as:

aleph0
^
|
|
0(...--> aleph0)0
0(...--> aleph0)1
0(...--> aleph0)0
0(...--> aleph0)1
1(...--> aleph0)0
1(...--> aleph0)1
1(...--> aleph0)0
1(...--> aleph0)1
|
|
v
aleph0

We can find a bijection between N and R by this way:

Code:
aleph0
^
|
|
7 <--> 0.0(...--> aleph0)0
5 <--> 0.0(...--> aleph0)1
3 <--> 0.0(...--> aleph0)0
1 <--> 0.0(...--> aleph0)1
2 <--> 0.1(...--> aleph0)0
4 <--> 0.1(...--> aleph0)1
6 <--> 0.1(...--> aleph0)0
8 <--> 0.1(...--> aleph0)1
|
|
v
aleph0

Therefore 2^aleph0 = aleph0
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
But there is another thing that i have found.

We still be able to use Cantor's function and get some number which is not in the list.

For example:

aleph0
^
|
|
0.0,x23,x33,x43,... ,0
0.0,x21,x31,x41,... ,1
0.1,x22,x32,x42,... ,0
0.1,x24,x34,x44,... ,1
|
|
v
aleph0

Our new result, which is not in the list, is the opposite of 0.0,x22,x33,x44,...

So in this point we are maybe in a logical disaster.

I think the sulotion is to use the idea of the open interval on a single number.

For example:

[0.x1,x2,x3,x4,... ,1)

More information you can find here:

http://www.geocities.com/complementarytheory/RiemannsBall.pdf
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Organic
Let us check these lists.


P(2) = {{},{0},{1},{0,1}} = 2^2 = 4

I am not an expert in set theory but doesn't {}={0}=0 and so it would be useless to write it in different ways?
 
Hi loop quantum gravity,

{{}} = {0}
 
\{ \} \neq \{ 0 \}. In general, 0 \neq \{ \}, but some models (including the one typically used in set theory) do make that identification.


Organic: you're missing a very important fact about the ordering structure of the integers:

If a sequence of integers has a first element and a last element, then the sequence is finite.

By definition, the digits in a decimal expansion are indexed by integers...

This means that:

0.0,x23,x33,x43,... ,0

(which I'm assuming is supposed to be some real number written in b-ary1[/size] notation) cannot have an infinite number of digits.

Similarly

0(...--> aleph0)0

cannot be a sequence2[/size] of binary digits.

(by this notation I'm assuming you mean that there are countably infinite numbers between the first 0 and the last 0)

Also,

7 <--> 0.0(...--> aleph0)0

cannot be a binary expansion of a real number.

(again I'm assuming that this notation means there are countably infinite numbers between the first and last digit)

Furthermore

The notation P(A) requires A to be a set. You should be saying P(\{ 0, 1\}) instead of P(2), and you should definitely be saying P(\mathbb{N}) instead of P(\aleph_0). (That is, assuming I understand correctly what you mean)

Moreover

the way you are listing the elements of the powerset of a finite set does not generalize to an infinite set. In particular, every element of the list:

Code:
...0000
...0001
...0010
...0011
...0100
...

has a finite number of ones. This is only a representation of the finite subsets of \mathbb{N}.


Additionally

I think the sulotion is to use the idea of the open interval on a single number.

For example:

[0.x1,x2,x3,x4,... ,1)

This is NOT the idea of an open interval. You should tell us what this means or stop using it.


footnotes:

1: b-ary means base-b representation. e.g. binary is 2-ary, decimal is 10-ary

2: Unless otherwise specified, a sequence is indexed by some segment the natural numbers.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 255 ·
9
Replies
255
Views
30K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K