(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); R=2^\alepha 0 vs Continuum hypothesis! A result in "a taste of topology"

A year ago or so I read a proof in A Taste Of Topology, Runde that the cardinality of the continuum equals the cardinality of the powerset of the natural numbers. But a few hours ago I found Hurkyl making that statement [tex]|\mathbb{R}| = |\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N})|[/tex] is undecidable in ZFC, I almost put in this proof but I realized this is the continuum hypothesis (would have been embarrassing!), so there must be something wrong, either in the proof of Runde or a misunderstanding (on by behalf) of the statement! Interestingly though, of all the reviews written on the book, there isn't a single mention of that statement!

Proposition [tex]c = 2^{\aleph_0}[/tex].

Here [tex]\aleph_0[/tex] denotes the cardinality of [tex]\mathbf{N}[/tex] and [tex]c[/tex] the cardinality of [tex]R[/tex]

The proof uses Cantor-Bernstein theorem, basically if [tex]2^{\aleph_0} \leq c[/tex] and [tex]2^{\aleph_0} \geq c[/tex] holds then [tex]2^{\aleph_0} = c[/tex]

Direction:[tex]2^{\aleph_0} \leq c[/tex].

Given [tex]S \subset N[/tex], define [tex](\sigma_{n}(S))^{\infty}_{n=1}[/tex] by letting [tex]\sigma_{n}(S) = 1[/tex] if [tex]n \in S[/tex] and [tex]\sigma_{n}(S) = 2[/tex] if [tex]n \notin S[/tex], and let [tex]r(S) := \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{\sigma_{n}(S)}{10^n}}[/tex]

Then [tex]P(\mathbf{N}) \rightarrow (0,1)[/tex] defined by [tex]S \rightarrow r(S)[/tex] is injective

Direction:[tex]2^{\aleph_0} \geq c[/tex]

For the converse inequality, we use the fact that every [tex]r \in (0, 1)[/tex] not only has a decimal expansion, but also a binary one: [tex]r := \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{\sigma_{n}(r)}{2^n}}[/tex] with [tex]\sigma_{n}(r) \in \{0,1\}[/tex] for [tex]n \in \mathbf{N}[/tex].

Hence, every number in [tex](0, 1)[/tex] can be represented by a string of zeros and ones.

This representation, however, is not unique: for example, both 1000 ... and 0111 ... represent the number [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex].

This, however, is the only way ambiguity can occur. Hence, whenever [tex]r \in (0,1)[/tex] has a period [tex]\overline{1}[/tex], we convene to pick its nonperiodic binary expansion. In this fashion, we assign, to each [tex]r \in (0, 1)[/tex], a unique sequence [tex](\sigma_{n}(r))^{\infty}_{n}=1[/tex] in [tex]\{0, 1\}[/tex].

The map [tex](0, 1) \rightarrow P(N)[/tex], [tex]r \rightarrow \{n \in N : \sigma_{n}(r) = 1\}[/tex] is then injective.

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# R=2^\alepha 0 vs Continuum hypothesis! A result in a taste of topology

Loading...

Similar Threads for R=2^alepha Continuum hypothesis |
---|

B How does r∪(-p∩q∩-r) simplify to r∪(-p∩q) ? |

I R-squared statistic for goodness-of-fit |

I R Value in Social Sciences |

A R1^2 + R2^2 = R3^2? |

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**