How much choice for free ultrafilters?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CRGreathouse
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Choice
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the ultrafilter theorem and the Axiom of Choice (AC) within the context of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (ZF). Participants explore whether weaker forms of choice can imply the ultrafilter theorem, the implications of the ultrafilter theorem on choice principles, and the requirements for constructing nonstandard analysis (NSA).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that in ZF, AC implies the ultrafilter theorem, questioning whether the converse is known to be false.
  • There is speculation about whether a weaker version of AC, such as countable choice, could imply the ultrafilter theorem.
  • Participants inquire if the ultrafilter theorem implies countable or dependent choice.
  • One participant suggests that countable choice might be sufficient for building nonstandard analysis, referencing the compactness theorem in logic.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the relevance of their contribution but finds it helpful for further exploration.
  • Links to external resources are provided for additional context and discussion related to the questions raised.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of the ultrafilter theorem or the necessary forms of choice for nonstandard analysis, indicating multiple competing views and ongoing uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved questions about the implications of weaker forms of choice and the specific requirements for nonstandard analysis, as well as the dependence on definitions related to the ultrafilter theorem.

CRGreathouse
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
2,832
Reaction score
0
In ZF, AC implies the ultrafilter theorem (every Boolean algebra has a free ultrafilter).

  • Is the converse known to be false? That is, is there a model of ZF where the ultrafilter theorem is true and AC is false?
  • Does some weaker version of AC (countable choice, for example) imply the ultrafilter theorem?
  • Does the ultrafilter theorem imply countable or dependent choice?
  • In particular, how much choice is needed to build nonstandard analysis? Can it be done with less than AC?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My guess is a countable choice would be enough for NSA, though I'm not sure. I'm guessing that because the compactness theorem in logic gives NSA and it's only needed in a countable case. (If [x]P(x) means there exists an x such that P(x) is true, and
S={[x]x<1, [x]x<1/2, [x]x<1/3, [x]x<1/4,...} has a model for every finite subset of S and so S has a model.) I really don't know if that has anything to do with what you're asking...

Sorry this wasn't more helpful.
 
phoenixthoth said:
Sorry this wasn't more helpful.

Are you kidding? That's great! It gives me an angle to start from, and it looks like it solves the biggest part of my question off the bat.

I'm going to look into this in more detail; I'll post again if I find something.
 
CRGreathouse said:
In ZF, AC implies the ultrafilter theorem (every Boolean algebra has a free ultrafilter).

  • Is the converse known to be false? That is, is there a model of ZF where the ultrafilter theorem is true and AC is false?
  • Does some weaker version of AC (countable choice, for example) imply the ultrafilter theorem?
  • Does the ultrafilter theorem imply countable or dependent choice?
  • In particular, how much choice is needed to build nonstandard analysis? Can it be done with less than AC?

The following link offers some discussion related to your questions.

http://at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/bbqa?forum=ask_a_topologist_2006;task=show_msg;msg=2629

There's a link provided in the above to a page by Eric Schechter that's worth a read.
Also, you might check out his book on "...analysis and its foundations".
 
fopc said:
The following link offers some discussion related to your questions.

http://at.yorku.ca/cgi-bin/bbqa?forum=ask_a_topologist_2006;task=show_msg;msg=2629

There's a link provided in the above to a page by Eric Schechter that's worth a read.
Also, you might check out his book on "...analysis and its foundations".

Thanks for the link! That really seems to answer the question. Now I only need the weaker ultrafilter theorem, but I think the two may be ZF-equivalent. I'll look some more into that.

I've been Schechter's site, but somehow I missed that page (or that part).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 333 ·
12
Replies
333
Views
20K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K