Collection of continuum subsets

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jostpuur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuum Subsets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of a defined set (collection) \mathcal{C} consisting of subsets of the interval [0,1] that meet specific criteria. Participants explore whether there exists an uncountable member within this collection, examining implications of the conditions set for membership in \mathcal{C>.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines the collection \mathcal{C} with specific conditions regarding closed subsets of [0,1] and proposes an example that belongs to \mathcal{C}.
  • Another participant argues that every element of \mathcal{C} must be countable, providing a proof based on the properties of the defined sets and a pigeonhole argument.
  • A third participant expresses disappointment at the inability to find an uncountable member, indicating a desire for such a member to exist.
  • Another participant agrees with the proof and connects the cardinality of elements in \mathcal{C} to that of disjoint intervals, suggesting that this connection clarifies the countability.
  • One participant reflects on the possibility of mapping countable ordinal numbers into \mathcal{C}, concluding that this is not feasible.
  • A later reply suggests that while elements corresponding to countable ordinals may exist in \mathcal{C}, there are no elements corresponding to uncountable ordinals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that elements of \mathcal{C} are countable, as supported by the proof provided. However, there remains a disagreement regarding the existence of uncountable members, with some participants expressing hope for their existence while others assert that they cannot exist.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations of the defined conditions in \mathcal{C} and the implications for cardinality, particularly in relation to countable versus uncountable sets. The exploration of mappings from ordinals also introduces additional complexity without resolution.

jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
Let's define a set (collection) \mathcal{C} by the following conditions.

X\in\mathcal{C} iff all following conditions hold:

1: X\subset [0,1].

2: X is closed.

3: If x\in X and x<1, then there exists x'\in X such that x<x'.

4: For all x\in X there exists a \delta_x >0 such that ]x,x+\delta_x[\;\cap\; X=\emptyset. (So x is not "cluster point from right".)

For example, if

<br /> X=\big\{1-\frac{1}{n}\;\big|\; n\in\{1,2,3,\ldots\}\big\}\;\cup\;\{1\}<br />

then X\in\mathcal{C}.

It is easy to construct all kinds of members of \mathcal{C}, but they all seem to be countable. My question is that does there exist an uncountable member in \mathcal{C}?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No; every element of \mathcal C is countable. Consider any X\in\mathcal C, and fix a function \delta:X\to(0,\infty) as guaranteed by (4). For any n \in \mathbb N, let
X_n:= \left\{x\in X: \enspace \delta_x \geq \frac 1 n\right\}.
As (x, x+\delta_x)\cap(y,y+\delta_y)=\emptyset for any distinct x,y\in X_n, it follows (from a pigeonhole argument) that 1\geq \sum_{x\in X_n}\delta_x\geq\sum_{x\in X_n}\frac 1 n = \frac 1 n |X_n|, i.e. |X_n|\leq n. In particular, X_n is finite. Then, as a countable union of finite sets, X = \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty X_n is countable.
 
Nice proof. I was hoping that an uncoutable member would have existed, so that's why I didn't succeed in proving this myself...
 
Yes it is all clear. A collection of disjoint intervals is always countable. Now X has the same cardinality as a collection of disjoint intervals. I must have been distracted by the other details.
 
I was hoping that I could define a mapping that maps all countable ordinal numbers into some set of \mathcal{C}. So the result was that this cannot be done. How unfortunate. But if you look at the first countable ordinal numbers, it would seem an intuitively reasonable feat.
 
Yeah, it's weird. It seems there exists an element X_\alpha \in \mathcal C which is order-isomphoric to [0,\alpha] for any countable ordinal \alpha, but not for any uncountable one (even the first uncountable one).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K