Cardinality of the set of all functions

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the cardinality of the set of all functions from the natural numbers (N) to the set {1, 2}. Participants explore the implications of mapping to a finite set and the relationship between functions and subsets of Cartesian products.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the cardinality of functions in relation to power sets and subsets, questioning how mapping to a finite set affects cardinality. They also explore the formal definition of functions and seek clarification on the equivalence between functions and subsets of Cartesian products.

Discussion Status

There are multiple interpretations being explored regarding the cardinality of functions from N to {1, 2}. Some participants have provided insights into the relationship between subsets and functions, while others are seeking further clarification on these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of formal definitions and properties of functions, as well as the implications of cardinality in the context of infinite sets and finite mappings.

ribbon
Messages
38
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


What is the cardinality of the set of all functions from N to {1,2}?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I know the cardinality of the set of all functions coincides with the respective power set (I think) so 2^n where n is the size of the set. The cardinality of N is aleph-nought, and its power set, 2^aleph nought.

However what limitations does mapping to a finite (2 elements) set here expose us to?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ribbon said:

Homework Statement


What is the cardinality of the set of all functions from N to {1,2}?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I know the cardinality of the set of all functions coincides with the respective power set (I think) so 2^n where n is the size of the set. The cardinality of N is aleph-nought, and its power set, 2^aleph nought.

However what limitations does mapping to a finite (2 elements) set here expose us to?

This would be one of those circumstances in which it is essential to use the formal definition of a function F from A to B as being a subset of A \times B with the property that for each a \in A there is exactly one b \in B such that (a,b) \in F.

Thus there are at most as many functions from \mathbb{N} to \{1,2\} as there are subsets of \mathbb{N} \times \{1,2\}.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
pasmith said:
This would be one of those circumstances in which it is essential to use the formal definition of a function F from A to B as being a subset of A \times B with the property that for each a \in A there is exactly one b \in B such that (a,b) \in F.

Thus there are at most as many functions from \mathbb{N} to \{1,2\} as there are subsets of \mathbb{N} \times \{1,2\}.

Interesting well I know the set N has 2^(aleph nought) subsets and the set S = {1, 2} has 2^2 subsets, so am I correct when I say:

2^(aleph nought) x 2^2 = 2^(aleph nought + 2)?

Also I am trying to more so understand your explanation of the equivalence of a function from A to B to a subset AxB? Is there anyway you could dumb that down a little more for me? Much appreciated!
 
ribbon said:
Also I am trying to more so understand your explanation of the equivalence of a function from A to B to a subset AxB? Is there anyway you could dumb that down a little more for me? Much appreciated!
Any function f:A→B defines a subset S of AxB consisting of the pairs {(a, f(a)):a in A}. S has the property that given a in A there exists a unique (a, b) in S.
Conversely, any subset of AxB with this property defines a function A→B, and two different such sets will define two different functions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
ribbon said:
Interesting well I know the set N has 2^(aleph nought) subsets and the set S = {1, 2} has 2^2 subsets, so am I correct when I say:

2^(aleph nought) x 2^2 = 2^(aleph nought + 2)?

All one can say is that the number of such functions is at most the cardinality of 2^{\mathbb{N} \times \{1,2\}}, which is uncountable by the diagonalization argument. But that is consistent with the possibility that the collection of those subsets of \mathbb{N} \times \{1,2\} which satisfy the condition to be a function is countable.

But there exists a bijection 2^\mathbb{N} \to \{f : \mathbb{N} \to \{1,2\}\}, so the number of such functions is exactly the cardinality of 2^{\mathbb{N}}. (To find the bijection, consider the subset of \mathbb{N} on which a function takes the value 1.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K