MHB Unbounded subset of ordinals a set?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RWood
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Set
Click For Summary
An unbounded subset C of the class of all ordinals R cannot be a set, but rather a class. This conclusion arises from the ability to establish a one-to-one correspondence between C and R, which implies that if C were a set, it would be bijective with some ordinal A. However, this leads to a contradiction since A cannot be bijective with R. The discussion assumes the framework of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with the Axiom of Choice (ZFC). Therefore, the assertion that an unbounded subset of ordinals is a class rather than a set is supported by this reasoning.
RWood
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Let R be the class of all ordinals. If a subset C of R is unbounded (i.e. for any ordinal \alpha \in R, there is \beta in C with \beta greater than \alpha ), then it seems to me that C cannot be a set, only a class. Is this true, and if so, how does one prove it? My reading on the general subject matter is limited to a bit of web browsing - perhaps the problem is trivial.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
RWood said:
Let R be the class of all ordinals. If a subset C of R is unbounded (i.e. for any ordinal \alpha \in R, there is \beta in C with \beta greater than \alpha ), then it seems to me that C cannot be a set, only a class. Is this true, and if so, how does one prove it? My reading on the general subject matter is limited to a bit of web browsing - perhaps the problem is trivial.

I think I have the outline of a proof (there may of course be something much quicker!).

1) It is quite easy to get a 1-1 correspondence between C and R; a map C=>R is obvious; a 1-1 map R=>C can be constructed by transfinite induction, using
the unboundedness of C to ensure successor elements (or limit ordinals) are mapped to an increasing sequence of C-members.

2) On the other hand, if C is a set then it is bijective with some ordinal A (and some cardinal as well). But then A would be bijective with R, and that is clearly impossible. All this assumes we are a ZFC world.
 
There is a nice little variation of the problem. The host says, after you have chosen the door, that you can change your guess, but to sweeten the deal, he says you can choose the two other doors, if you wish. This proposition is a no brainer, however before you are quick enough to accept it, the host opens one of the two doors and it is empty. In this version you really want to change your pick, but at the same time ask yourself is the host impartial and does that change anything. The host...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K