Axiom of Infinity & Garling, Th. 1.7.4 & the successor set

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axiom Infinity Set
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on D. J. H. Garling's "A Course in Mathematical Analysis: Volume I," specifically Section 1.7 regarding the Axiom of Infinity and Theorem 1.7.4. The main issue raised is the construction of the successor set ##Z^+##, defined as ##Z^+ = \cap \{ B \in P(S) : B \text{ is a successor set } \}##. Participants clarify that a successor set must include the empty set and all its successors, leading to the conclusion that the initial examples provided by the user were incorrect. The correct formulation of the successor set includes infinite elements, confirming that Garling's definition aligns with the concept of an inductive set.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of set theory concepts, particularly successor sets.
  • Familiarity with the Axiom of Infinity in mathematical analysis.
  • Knowledge of the notation used in set theory, including power sets (P(S)) and intersection (∩).
  • Basic comprehension of inductive sets and their properties.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Axiom of Infinity and its implications in set theory.
  • Learn about the properties and definitions of inductive sets in mathematical literature.
  • Explore the construction and examples of successor sets in various mathematical contexts.
  • Review Garling's definitions and theorems in "A Course in Mathematical Analysis" for deeper insights.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of mathematical analysis, and anyone interested in foundational concepts of set theory and the Axiom of Infinity will benefit from this discussion.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading D. J. H. Garling: "A Course in Mathematical Analysis: Volume I Foundations and Elementary Real Analysis ... ...

I am currently focused on Garling's Section 1.7 The Foundation Axiom and the Axiom of Infinity ... ...

I need some help with Theorem 1.7.4 ... and in particular with the notion of a successor set ##Z^+## ... ...... ... the relevant text from Garling is as follows:
?temp_hash=ac8c3c6753bcd64546b6d02e773f06ff.png

In the above text we read the following:

" ... ... Suppose that ##S## is a successor set. Let

##Z^+ = \cap \{ B \in P(S) : B \text{ is a successor set } \} ## ... "
Note also that Garling defines a successor set as follows:

" ... ... A set ##A## is called a successor set if ##\emptyset \in A## and if ##a^+ \in A## whenever ##a \in A## ... ... "and

Garling defines ##a^+## as follows:

" ... ... If ##a## is a set, we define ##a^+## to be the set ##a \cup \{ a \}## ... ... "
Now my problem is that I do not understand the definition of ##Z^+## ... ... in each example I construct I seem to get ##Z^+ = \emptyset## ... ... and this cannot be right ...For example ...

Suppose that a successor set S is such that:

##S = \{ \emptyset , a , a \cup \{ a \} , \{ a , b \}, \{ a , b \} \cup \{ \{ a , b \} \} \}##

... then we have ...

##Z^+ = \cap B_i ## where ##B_i \in P(S)## and each ##B_i## is a successor set ...

then we have ..

##B_1 = \{ \emptyset, a , a \cup \{ a \} \}##

##B_2 = \{ \emptyset, \{ a , b \} , \{ a , b \} \cup \{ \{ a , b \} \} \}##

and

##B_3 = S##Indeed,

##B_1, B_2, B_3## seem to me to be the only subsets of ##P(S)## that are successor setsand##\cup B_i = \emptyset##BUT ... surely this cannot be right ...Can someone clarify this issue and show me how ##Z^+## is meant to be constructed ...

Hope someone can help ...

Peter====================================================

In order to enable readers to get a better understanding of Garling's notation and approach I am providing the first two pages of Section 1.7 ... as follows:
?temp_hash=ac8c3c6753bcd64546b6d02e773f06ff.png

?temp_hash=ac8c3c6753bcd64546b6d02e773f06ff.png
 

Attachments

  • Garling -  Successor Sets.png
    Garling - Successor Sets.png
    91.8 KB · Views: 1,025
  • Garling - 1 - Section 1.7 - Foundation Axiom and Axiom of Infinity - Part 1 ... ... .png
    Garling - 1 - Section 1.7 - Foundation Axiom and Axiom of Infinity - Part 1 ... ... .png
    35.1 KB · Views: 1,065
  • Garling - 2 - Section 1.7 - Foundation Axiom and Axiom of Infinity - Part 2.png
    Garling - 2 - Section 1.7 - Foundation Axiom and Axiom of Infinity - Part 2.png
    39.6 KB · Views: 814
Physics news on Phys.org
Math Amateur said:
##Z^+ = \cap B_i ## where ##B_i \in P(S)## and each ##B_i## is a successor set ...

then we have ..

##B_1 = \{ \emptyset, a , a \cup \{ a \} \}##

B_1 is not a successor set. Maybe you are confused by the use of the variable a in the definition of successor set. The definition means "for any set a, if a is in A, then a^+ is in A".

So if A is a successor set, then 0 is in A, and so is 0^+, and so is 0^{++}, etc. So every successor set has an infinite number of elements.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks Steven ... Based on what you have said, I'll now try to reformulate my example ...

I am assuming ##S## should be as follows ... ...

##S = \{ \emptyset , \emptyset^+, \emptyset^{++}, \emptyset^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ , a, a^+, a^{++}, a^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ , \{ a , b \}, \{ a , b \}^+, \{ a , b \}^{++}, \{ a , b \}^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ \} ##Then Garling defines ##Z^+## as follows:##Z^+ = \cap B_i## where ##B_i \in P(S)## and each ##B_i## is a successor set ...... ... then we find ... ...##B_1 = \{ \emptyset , \emptyset^+, \emptyset^{++}, \emptyset^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ \}####B_2 = \{ \emptyset , \emptyset^+, \emptyset^{++}, \emptyset^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ a, a^+, a^{++}, a^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ \}####B_3 = \{ \emptyset , \emptyset^+, \emptyset^{++}, \emptyset^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ , \{ a , b \}, \{ a , b \}^+, \{ a , b \}^{++}, \{ a , b \}^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ \}##

and

##B_4 = S##... so ... ...##B_1, B_2, B_3, B_4 ## now seem to me to be the only subsets of ##P(S)## that are successor setsand we find that ...##\cap B_i = \{ \emptyset , \emptyset^+, \emptyset^{++}, \emptyset^{+++}, \ ... \ ... \ ... \ \}##Is that correct?

PeterNOTE - just by the way, I think that what Garling is calling a "successor set" is often called an "inductive set" ... can you confirm that this is the case?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K