Can A' Be Considered Countable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter trash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the countability of the set A, defined as the collection of functions from integers to integers that are non-zero for only a finite number of inputs. The original poster considers a related set A', which consists of functions from natural numbers to natural numbers with the same non-zero condition, and seeks to establish a connection between the countability of A and A'.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to prove that A and A' have the same cardinality and explores the implications of defining subsets A'_k for functions that are non-zero for exactly k inputs. They question whether the union of these countable sets leads to the countability of A'.
  • Some participants clarify that the countable union of countable sets is indeed countable and discuss the implications of the product of countable sets, noting a potential misunderstanding regarding the nature of infinite products versus finite products.
  • Others suggest that the functions defined by the original poster could also be used to establish the equivalence of countability between A and A'.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing clarifications and affirmations regarding the countability of unions of sets and the nature of infinite products. There is no explicit consensus, but guidance has been offered regarding the original poster's concerns about the implications of their definitions and the steps needed to prove their claims.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of countability in the context of infinite sets and functions, with specific attention to the definitions and properties of countable unions and products. The original poster expresses uncertainty about the implications of their definitions and the generalization of their arguments.

trash
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let A=\{f:\mathbb{Z}\to\mathbb{Z}: f(n)\neq 0 \text{for a finite number of n}\}, prove that A is countable.


Homework Equations


I'm considering using that it would be equivalent to prove that the set A'=\{f:\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{N}: f(n)\neq 0 \text{for a finite number of n}\} is countable.


The Attempt at a Solution



I'm dividing this solution in two steps, first proving what I stated en (2), this is, that A and A' have the same cardinal. I'm still trying to prove this.
(...)

Then prove A' is countable, I define A'_k = \{f:\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{N}: f(n)\neq 0 \text{ for k numbers}, I want to prove that every A'_k is countable. I define now the function g_k:A'_k\to \underbrace{\mathbb{N}\times\dots\times\mathbb{N}}_{\text{2k}} by g_k(f)=(n_1,\dots,n_k,f(n_1),\dots,f(n_k)) where n_1,n_2,\dots are the points where f is not zero.
This function defines (or at least it seems to me) an injection to the set A'_k to a countable set.
A problem is that only a finite product of countable sets is countable, can I still conclude A' after take the union of the A'_k?.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
trash said:
A problem is that only a finite product of countable sets is countable, can I still conclude A' after take the union of the A'_k?.

Yes. You have shown each ##A^\prime_k## to be countable. The countable union of countable sets is countable, thus
\bigcup_k A^\prime_k
is countable.

Your remark about the product of countable sets makes me think you make the following error: let ##B_n = \mathbb{N}^n## for ##n\in \mathbb{N}##. This is countable. But
\mathbb{N}^\mathbb{N} = \bigcup B_n
is uncountable. The flaw here is that the above equality does not hold. That is, we only have
\bigcup B_n \subset \mathbb{N}^\mathbb{N}
And this inclusion is strict. Prove this. (Also, I identify here an element ##(k_1,...,k_n)\in B_n## with ##(k_1,...,k_n,0,0,...)\in \mathbb{N}^{\mathbb{N}}##).
 
Last edited:
A couple of minor points:
micromass said:
The union of countable sets is countable
The countable union of countable sets is countable
And this union is strict.
"And this subset is strict."
 
haruspex said:
A couple of minor points:

The countable union of countable sets is countable

"And this subset is strict."

Thank you very much. I'll correct them!
 
micromass said:
Yes. You have shown each ##A^\prime_k## to be countable. The countable union of countable sets is countable, thus
\bigcup_k A^\prime_k
is countable.

Your remark about the product of countable sets makes me think you make the following error: let ##B_n = \mathbb{N}^n## for ##n\in \mathbb{N}##. This is countable. But
\mathbb{N}^\mathbb{N} = \bigcup B_n
is uncountable. The flaw here is that the above equality does not hold. That is, we only have
\bigcup B_n \subset \mathbb{N}^\mathbb{N}
And this inclusion is strict. Prove this. (Also, I identify here an element ##(k_1,...,k_n)\in B_n## with ##(k_1,...,k_n,0,0,...)\in \mathbb{N}^{\mathbb{N}}##).
Thanks a lot.
Just for clarification, my worry comes mainly because of the product. I'm trying to deal with an intuitive way to think about the infinity in this case, I thought the problem was how I defined the function g_k, because I defined an injection to the set of \underbrace{\mathbb{N}\times\dots\times\mathbb{N}}_{\text{2k}} and k increases to infinity (A'=\bigcup_{k=1}^{\infty}) then I wouldn't be able to do the general step and say the union is countable.

Regarding to the part above when I said I still was trying to find a way to prove A countable \iff A' countable. The functions I defined in this thread would work as well to prove this part?.
 
Last edited:
trash said:
Thanks a lot.
I wouldn't be able to do the general step and say the union is countable.

What do you mean? You can show it for any integer ##k## and then just take the union. This works.

Do you mean you can't do this for ##k=+\infty##? That's true.

Regarding to the part above when I said I still was trying to find a way to prove A countable \iff A' countable. The functions I defined in this thread would work as well to prove this part?.

Yes.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K