home.social

#ordinalnumbers β€” Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #ordinalnumbers, aggregated by home.social.

  1. Take a set, π‘₯. Is it finite or infinite? Well what definition do you use?

    β‘  βˆƒπ‘¦ ∈ Ο‰β‚€ π‘₯ β‰ˆ 𝑦 ; There is a natural number, 𝑦, such that you may may map 𝑦 one-to-one onto the set π‘₯, enumerating each of its members. So π‘₯ is finite for the same reason { 1, 2, 3 } is finite.

    β‘‘ Β¬ βˆƒπ‘§ ∈ (On βˆ– Ο‰β‚€) π‘₯ β‰ˆ 𝑧 ; There is no such infinite ordinal, 𝑧, such that you may map 𝑧 one-to-one onto the set π‘₯. So π‘₯ is finite because Ο‰β‚€, the smallest infinite ordinal, cannot be mapped 1-to-1 into it.

    Do β‘  and β‘‘ say the same thing?

    Obviously, β‘  implies β‘‘ in all cases for if it didn't there would be at least one natural number, 𝑦, which may be used to enumerate at least one infinite ordinal, 𝑧.

    But does β‘‘ imply β‘ ? If β‘‘ doesn't imply β‘  then there must be sets which can't be be placed side-by-side with any infinite ordinal and yet can't be placed side-by-side with any finite ordinal. In short, there must be sets which can't be well-ordered. But the axiom of choice says all sets may be well-ordered, even if it doesn't provide a recipe.

    Not only does the axiom of choice say all sets can be well-ordered and thus β‘‘ implies β‘ , but assuming β‘‘ implies β‘  is equivalent to the axiom of choice. It was invented by Zermelo for this purpose and so that β‘ , β‘‘, and 6 alternative definitions of "finite set" all mean the same thing.

    The axiom of choice is basically saying the border between finite and infinite has nothing trapped in it.

    #AxiomOfChoice #OrdinalNumbers #SetTheory #FiniteSet

  2. Every well-ordered set is isomorphic to an ordinal. Common notion, for example see Introduction to arxiv.org/abs/2409.07352

    ⊒((𝐴∈Vβˆ§π‘…We𝐴)β†”βˆƒπ‘“(domπ‘“βˆˆOnβˆ§π‘“IsomE,𝑅(dom𝑓,𝐴)))

    \[ \vdash ( ( A \in \mathrm{V} \wedge R \mathrm{We} A ) \leftrightarrow \exists f ( \mathrm{dom} f \in \mathrm{On} \wedge f \mathrm{Isom} \mathrm{E} , R ( \mathrm{dom} f , A ) ) ) \]

    Every well-ordered set is isomorphic to
    a unique ordinal.

    ⊒((𝐴∈Vβˆ§π‘…We𝐴)β†”βˆƒ!π‘œβˆˆOnβˆƒπ‘“βˆˆ(π΄β†‘β‚˜π‘œ)𝑓IsomE,𝑅(π‘œ,𝐴))

    \[ \vdash ( ( A \in \mathrm{V} \wedge R \mathrm{We} A ) \leftrightarrow \exists{!} o \in \mathrm{On} \exists f \in ( A \uparrow_\mathrm{m} o ) f \mathrm{Isom} \mathrm{E} , R ( o , A ) ) \]

    We can phrase the Axiom of Choice as "Every set injects into an ordinal."

    ⊒(CHOICEβ†”βˆ€π‘₯βˆƒπ‘œβˆˆOnπ‘₯β‰Όπ‘œ)

    \[ \vdash ( \mathrm{CHOICE} \leftrightarrow \forall x \exists o \in \mathrm{On} x \preccurlyeq o ) \]

    #math #metamath #SetTheory #WellOrdering #OrdinalNumbers