Does Every Set Have a Unique Power Set? Understanding Cantor's Proof

  • Thread starter Thread starter cragar
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Cantor's proof demonstrates that for every set X, the size of its power set P(X) is strictly greater than the size of X itself. The function f maps elements of X to subsets in P(X), but the construction of set Y, which includes elements not mapped to themselves, leads to a contradiction if any element z is both in Y and f(z). This contradiction shows that f cannot be onto, reinforcing that |X| < |P(X)|. The discussion clarifies that elements of X cannot be directly included in P(X) since P(X) consists of subsets rather than individual elements. Understanding this distinction helps in grasping the nature of the mapping and the implications of Cantor's theorem.
cragar
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
3
Im trying to understand this proof by Cantor.
For every set X, |X|&lt;|P(x)|
Proof. Let f be a function from X into P(x)
the set Y=(x \in X: x \notin f(x) )
is not in the range of f:
if z \in X where such that f(z)=Y, then z \in Y
if and only if z \notin Y, a contradiction. Thus f is not
a function of X onto P(x).
Hence |P(x)|≠|X|, the function
f(x)={x} is a one-to-one function of X into P(x) and so
|X|≤|P(x)|. it follows that
|X|<|P(x)|.
I don't understand why z can't be in Y and f(z).
I guess that's because they defined it that way.
Is it because we want to find a one-to-one function from
the set to the power set, and because we want it to be one-to-one
we want to map every x to a unique element in the power set we don't want x to get mapped to itself. Is that the reason. And do we need z to be in Y and f(z) for it to be onto.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
cragar said:
Y=(x \in X: x \notin f(x) )

I don't understand why z can't be in Y and f(z).
I guess that's because they defined it that way.

yes
Is it because… we don't want x to get mapped to itself.

but x can't get mapped to itself … x and f(x) are in different spaces
 
so if x got mapped to itself, it wouldn't be onto.
 
cragar said:
so if x got mapped to itself, it wouldn't be onto.

We CAN'T map x to itself. Since x is not an element of P(X).
 
Is it because… we don't want x to get mapped to itself.

The element x is not in P(X).
P(X) contains the set containing x (that is, it contains {x}), but it does not contain x itself. Remember that the power is the set of subsets of X.
 
this might be a dumb question, but maybe we didn't do a very good job of defining our funtion from the set to the powerset. why can't x be in P(x)
 
cragar said:
this might be a dumb question, but maybe we didn't do a very good job of defining our funtion from the set to the powerset. why can't x be in P(x)

The elements of P(X) are subsets, not elements, of X. P(X) contains {x}, but not x itself.
 
cragar said:
this might be a dumb question, but maybe we didn't do a very good job of defining our funtion from the set to the powerset. why can't x be in P(x)

A simple example will help you. Take X={1,2,3}, then P(X)=\{∅,{1},{2},{3},{1,2},{2,3},{1,3},{1,2,3}}. As you see, 1 is not an element of P(X). But {1} is an element of P(X).
 
ok thanks for the responses, it makes more sense now.
 
Back
Top