Collection of continuum subsets

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jostpuur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuum Subsets
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 2K views
jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
Let's define a set (collection) [itex]\mathcal{C}[/itex] by the following conditions.

[itex]X\in\mathcal{C}[/itex] iff all following conditions hold:

1: [itex]X\subset [0,1][/itex].

2: [itex]X[/itex] is closed.

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

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

For example, if

[tex] X=\big\{1-\frac{1}{n}\;\big|\; n\in\{1,2,3,\ldots\}\big\}\;\cup\;\{1\}[/tex]

then [itex]X\in\mathcal{C}[/itex].

It is easy to construct all kinds of members of [itex]\mathcal{C}[/itex], but they all seem to be countable. My question is that does there exist an uncountable member in [itex]\mathcal{C}[/itex]?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No; every element of [itex]\mathcal C[/itex] is countable. Consider any [itex]X\in\mathcal C[/itex], and fix a function [itex]\delta:X\to(0,\infty)[/itex] as guaranteed by (4). For any [itex]n \in \mathbb N,[/itex] let
[tex]X_n:= \left\{x\in X: \enspace \delta_x \geq \frac 1 n\right\}.[/tex]
As [itex](x, x+\delta_x)\cap(y,y+\delta_y)=\emptyset[/itex] for any distinct [itex]x,y\in X_n,[/itex] it follows (from a pigeonhole argument) that [tex]1\geq \sum_{x\in X_n}\delta_x\geq\sum_{x\in X_n}\frac 1 n = \frac 1 n |X_n|,[/tex] i.e. [itex]|X_n|\leq n.[/itex] In particular, [itex]X_n[/itex] is finite. Then, as a countable union of finite sets, [tex]X = \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty X_n[/tex] 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 [itex]X[/itex] 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 [itex]\mathcal{C}[/itex]. 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 [itex]X_\alpha \in \mathcal C[/itex] which is order-isomphoric to [itex][0,\alpha][/itex] for any countable ordinal [itex]\alpha,[/itex] but not for any uncountable one (even the first uncountable one).
 
Last edited: