1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Homework Help: Math Proof: Uncountable binary sequence and a bijection from R to R-{0}

  1. Dec 3, 2011 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data
    Question 1:
    Prove that the cardinality of R (the set of all real numbers)is the same as the cardinality of R-{0} by constructing a bijective function from R to R-{0}

    Question 2: Let A be the infinite sequence of binary numbers as follows:
    A={(a1,a2,a3...)|ai= 0or 1 for all i in the natural numbers}

    Show that A is uncountable


    2. Relevant equations



    3. The attempt at a solution

    For question 2 I think I have to use a proof similar to Cantor's diagonalization argument for proving that the set of real numbers is uncountable. I think I have to use contradiction and assume that the set is countable.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 3, 2011 #2
    Yes, for (2) you need to do something very similar to Cantor diagonalization.

    For one, you'll want to find a bijection [itex]f:\mathbb{R}\setminus \{0\}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}[/itex].

    Hint, if [itex]x\notin \mathbb{N}[/itex], define f(x)=x.
     
  4. Dec 3, 2011 #3
    I think Imay have misunderstood the second part. Isnt f(x) still f(x)=x?
     
  5. Dec 3, 2011 #4
    You define f(x)=x in (1) for all x not in [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex].
     
  6. Dec 3, 2011 #5
    so {(x| x =/= 1,2,3,4....)} ?
     
  7. Dec 3, 2011 #6
    Uuh, what do you mean with that??

    Also note that I consider 0 to be in [itex]\mathbb{N}[/itex].
     
  8. Dec 3, 2011 #7
    gahh im so sorry I dont understand..am I looking for a function that hits all numbers except for 0,1,2,3.....?
     
  9. Dec 3, 2011 #8
    No, that's not what I stated. I just said you had to define f(x)=x for [itex]x\notin\{0,1,2,3,...\}[/itex]. You still need to define f(0), f(1), f(2), ...

    But you have to end up with a bijection [itex]f:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\setminus \{0\}[/itex].
     
  10. Dec 3, 2011 #9
    so how about f(x)={x+1 for the natural numbers and x otherwise) would that make it so that x is not in the natural numbers but f(x) exists for the natural numbers?
     
  11. Dec 3, 2011 #10
    That's a nice proposal!!
     
  12. Dec 3, 2011 #11
    yay...i cant believe it took me that long to understand what you were trying to say..its obvious now though :)
     
  13. Dec 17, 2011 #12
    Just wondering if under that function, the preimage of 1.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Loading...