Cardinality of set of real periodic functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the cardinality of the set A of real periodic functions. Participants explore various mathematical arguments related to the properties of periodic functions, their cardinalities, and the implications of different mappings and constructions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that the set of real periodic functions A includes functions like sin(x) but incorrectly claims that f(x) = x is periodic, leading to a discussion on the implications for cardinality.
  • Another participant challenges the initial claim about f(x) = x, stating it is not periodic and questioning the logic behind the cardinality argument presented.
  • A participant introduces the concept of cardinality of the real numbers and discusses the continuum hypothesis, defining c as the cardinality of the reals and exploring the cardinality of constant and nonconstant periodic functions.
  • One participant proposes a mapping from periodic functions to pairs involving their period and restrictions, suggesting that this mapping could establish a bijection, although later acknowledges potential errors in this reasoning.
  • Another participant mentions the indicator function over the rationals as a periodic function and questions the definition of its period.
  • A participant revises their earlier claims about the cardinality of periodic functions, suggesting that the cardinality of A is c^c, while admitting to previous mistakes in their reasoning.
  • One participant suggests a simpler mapping approach to establish the cardinality of periodic functions, proposing that each subset of R corresponds to a distinct periodic function.
  • A later reply agrees with the simpler mapping idea and reinforces the conclusion about the cardinality of A being c^c.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement on the initial claims regarding periodic functions and their cardinalities. Multiple competing views remain regarding the correct approach to determining the cardinality of the set A, and the discussion does not reach a consensus.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the definitions of periodic functions and the implications of various mappings. The discussion includes corrections and refinements of earlier claims without establishing a definitive resolution.

TTob
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
what is the cardinality of a set A of real periodic functions ?
f(x)=x is periodic so R is subset of A but not equal because sin(x) is in A but not in R. hence aleph_1<|A|.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
f(x)=x is periodic so R is subset of A but not equal because sin(x) is in A but not in R. hence aleph_1<|A|.

What?

f(x) = x isn't periodic. And even if it was, that would only tell you A has cardinality at least 1. sin(x) is in A but not R... is R supposed to be the real numbers? How can a function be a number? Also, just because you add a single element to a set doesn't mean the cardinality changes either way
 
First, note: [tex]\lvert \mathbb{R} \rvert = 2^{\aleph_0}[/tex], and the statement that [tex]\lvert \mathbb{R} \rvert = \aleph_1[/tex] is the continuum hypothesis holds (which cannot be proven or disproven in ZFC).

I shall denote [tex]c = 2^{\aleph_0} = \lvert \mathbb{R} \rvert[/tex]. Let C be the set of constant functions from [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex] to [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex], and let P be the set of nonconstant periodic functions from [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex] to [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex]; then [tex]A = C \cup P[/tex] is a union of disjoint sets. Clearly [tex]\lvert C \rvert = c[/tex].

Let [tex]P' = \{(p, f') \mid p \in \mathbb{R}^+, f' \colon [0, p) \to \mathbb{R} \}[/tex]; I construct a function [tex]g \colon P \to P'[/tex] by assigning to each periodic function [tex]f \in P[/tex] the pair [tex](p, f')[/tex], where p is the period of f, and f' is the restriction of f to [0, p). It is a bijection; you should check this. Now since [tex]\lvert [0, p) \rvert = \lvert \mathbb{R} \rvert[/tex] for any positive p, [tex]\lvert P \rvert = \lvert P' \rvert = \lvert \mathbb{R}^+ \times \mathbb{R}^{\mathbb{R}} \rvert = c \cdot c^c = c^c (= 2^{\aleph_0 \cdot c} = 2^c = 2^{2^{\aleph_0}})[/tex]. Thus [tex]\lvert A \rvert = \lvert C \rvert + \lvert P \rvert = c^c = \lvert \mathbb{R}^{\mathbb{R}} \rvert[/tex], the cardinality of the set of all functions from [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex] to [tex]\mathbb{R}[/tex].
 
I pick f to be the indicator function over the rationals (which is periodic). What is p?
 
Office_Shredder said:
I pick f to be the indicator function over the rationals (which is periodic). What is p?

Well, that's a pretty embarrassing mistake.

Well, let's fix that up. I let P instead be the set of periodic functions with a smallest positive period; then [tex]\lvert P \rvert = c^c[/tex] (I think; see below). Then [tex]c^c = \lvert P \rvert \le \lvert A \rvert \le c^c[/tex], so [tex]\lvert A \rvert = c^c[/tex].

Another embarrassing mistake I made: g isn't really a surjection. I don't know exactly how to handle that, then, but I'm still sure that [tex]\lvert P \rvert = c^c[/tex].
 
I remember how to do this. Given A a subset of R... we can map [0,1) onto R, so we can map [0,1) onto A, say by a function f. Then extend f to a function F by F(x) = f([x]) where [x] is the rational part of x. F is periodic and has as its range A. Hence for each subset of R, we have a distinct periodic function, and then just use the fact that the set of periodic functions is a subset of the set of all functions R->R and the cardinality of the latter is cc
 
Your idea is a lot simpler; thanks. This is what I thought of when I read your post:

The mapping from [tex]\mathbb{R}^{[0, 1)}[/tex] to the set [tex]A \subseteq \mathbb{R}^\mathbb{R}[/tex] of periodic functions by periodic extension (as you describe explicitly) is an injection, so [tex]c^c = \lvert \mathbb{R}^{[0, 1)} \rvert \le \lvert A \rvert \le \lvert \mathbb{R}^\mathbb{R} \rvert = c^c[/tex], so [tex]\lvert A \rvert = c^c[/tex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K