Is the Equality of Aleph Null and Aleph One Proven Through Factorials?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Doom of Doom
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between the cardinalities of aleph null and aleph one, specifically examining whether (aleph null)! equals aleph one. The factorial function for aleph null is defined through the Cartesian product of countable sets, leading to the conclusion that (aleph null)! has cardinality beth one, contingent upon the Continuum Hypothesis (CH). The argument presented involves constructing a bijection between the Cartesian product of natural numbers and the power set of naturals, ultimately suggesting that without CH, (aleph null)! does not equal aleph one.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of cardinality and infinite sets
  • Familiarity with the Continuum Hypothesis (CH)
  • Knowledge of factorial functions in set theory
  • Concept of bijections and Cartesian products
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Continuum Hypothesis in set theory
  • Explore the properties of cardinal numbers and their operations
  • Learn about bijections and their role in establishing set equivalences
  • Investigate the relationship between factorials and cardinalities in infinite sets
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, set theorists, and students of advanced mathematics interested in cardinality, infinite sets, and the implications of the Continuum Hypothesis.

Doom of Doom
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
How might one show that (aleph_null)! = aleph_1?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One might start by defining the "factorial function" for aleph_null!
 
Ok, so the person who proposed this problem to me gave me a way to understand (aleph_null)!.

So, consider two sets, A and B. Then |A|*|B|=|A x B|, where AxB is the cartesian product of A and B.

Thus, consider N_m={1,2,3,...m}, and |N_m|=m.

Then (aleph_null)! = |N_1 x N_2 x N_3 x ... |.

So how can I find a bijection from N_1 x N_2 x N_3 x ... to, say, P(N), the power set of the naturals?
 
Consider {1} x {1, 2} x {1, 2, 3} x ... as the base 1-2-3-... expansion of a number in [0, 1), then biject [0, 1) with the reals by your favorite method. You have at most a countable number of issues with rational numbers. which you can likewise deal with in your preferred method.

This shows that the set has cardinality \beth_1, not \aleph_1 unless you have the CH.
 
Or show that 1x2x3x4...is greater than or equal to 2x2x2x2x2... and less than or equal to aleph null^aleph null. Still, this only indicates the factorial is equal to beth_1 without CH, like CRGreathouse said.
 
If there are an infinite number of natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and... then that must mean that there are not only infinite infinities, but an infinite number of those infinities. and an infinite number of those...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K