Real Analysis: countably infinite subsets of infinite sets proof

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that every infinite subset contains a countably infinite subset, situated within the context of real analysis and set theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts a proof by cases, considering both countably infinite and uncountably infinite subsets. Some participants question the necessity of the Axiom of Choice in the proof, while others explore implications of not being able to select distinct elements from the set.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem and the role of the Axiom of Choice. Some guidance has been offered regarding the implications of choosing elements from the set, but no consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the Axiom of Choice has not been covered in class, raising concerns about its use in the proof. There is also a discussion about the implications of being unable to select distinct elements from the infinite set.

TeenieBopper
Messages
27
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove that every infinite subset contains a countably infinite subset.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Right now, I'm working on a proof by cases.

Let S be an infinite subset.

Case 1: If S is countably infinite, because the set S is a subset of itself, it contains a countably infinite subset.

Case 2: If S is uncountably infinite...


And this is where I'm stuck. I know it's true (the Reals contains the Integers, the power set of the Reals still contains the Integers, etc) I've done some other searching online, and I keep seeing references to the Axiom of Choice used to prove this; we haven't talked about it in class, so I'd like to avoid this if at all possible, since if I use it, I'd have to prove that too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think you can prove it without the axiom of choice, which allows you to build a set by making an infinite number of choices. You don't prove the axiom of choice. That's why it is an axiom. There are consistent models of set theory with and without it.

If you assume the axiom of choice, the proof should be pretty straightforward. For each n \in \mathbb{N}, choose a distinct element x_n \in S, so that x_n \neq x_m if n \neq m. Suppose this were impossible for some n. What would that imply about S?
 
TeenieBopper said:
And this is where I'm stuck. I know it's true (the Reals contains the Integers, the power set of the Reals still contains the Integers, etc) I've done some other searching online, and I keep seeing references to the Axiom of Choice used to prove this; we haven't talked about it in class, so I'd like to avoid this if at all possible, since if I use it, I'd have to prove that too.

It's puzzling that you'd be asked to prove this before you've seen the Axiom of Choice.
 
I'm not exactly sure what you're asking; if it's impossible to choose an x_n for some n, doesn't that mean S is finite?


Does this work?

Case 2: S is uncountably infinite.

Let n ε Z+. For each n, choose on distinct element s_n ε S. This establishes a one to one correspondence between Z+ and a subset of S. Because Z+ is countably infinite, this subset is countably infinite. Thus, S has a countably infinite subset.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K