Cardinality of the set of all real functions of real variable












35














How does one compute the cardinality of the set of functions $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ (not necessarily continuous)?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You have used the assumption that the Cardinality of power set of R is equal to the Cardinality of functions from real to {0,1}. How to we prove that as well?
    – user39246
    Sep 2 '12 at 10:59










  • @krishnanem: Please ask new questions in a new thread, rather than as an answer to a previous question. Furthermore, this question was asked and answered several times before.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 11:17












  • @AsafKaragila: I have moved this non-answer to a comment so that krishnanem can pose it as a new question and can read your comment.
    – robjohn
    Sep 2 '12 at 20:39










  • @robjohn: I think Michael's comment would have been a more suitable choice over mine.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 21:44










  • @AsafKaragila: The point is to have krishnanem post the comment as a new question. Your comment solely addresses that point. Michael's also addresses the misplaced question and might encourage a reply.
    – robjohn
    Sep 3 '12 at 3:18
















35














How does one compute the cardinality of the set of functions $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ (not necessarily continuous)?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You have used the assumption that the Cardinality of power set of R is equal to the Cardinality of functions from real to {0,1}. How to we prove that as well?
    – user39246
    Sep 2 '12 at 10:59










  • @krishnanem: Please ask new questions in a new thread, rather than as an answer to a previous question. Furthermore, this question was asked and answered several times before.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 11:17












  • @AsafKaragila: I have moved this non-answer to a comment so that krishnanem can pose it as a new question and can read your comment.
    – robjohn
    Sep 2 '12 at 20:39










  • @robjohn: I think Michael's comment would have been a more suitable choice over mine.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 21:44










  • @AsafKaragila: The point is to have krishnanem post the comment as a new question. Your comment solely addresses that point. Michael's also addresses the misplaced question and might encourage a reply.
    – robjohn
    Sep 3 '12 at 3:18














35












35








35


15





How does one compute the cardinality of the set of functions $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ (not necessarily continuous)?










share|cite|improve this question















How does one compute the cardinality of the set of functions $f:mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ (not necessarily continuous)?







elementary-set-theory cardinals






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Sep 2 '12 at 11:05









Asaf Karagila

301k32422755




301k32422755










asked Jan 17 '11 at 23:26









Benji

2,12631823




2,12631823












  • You have used the assumption that the Cardinality of power set of R is equal to the Cardinality of functions from real to {0,1}. How to we prove that as well?
    – user39246
    Sep 2 '12 at 10:59










  • @krishnanem: Please ask new questions in a new thread, rather than as an answer to a previous question. Furthermore, this question was asked and answered several times before.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 11:17












  • @AsafKaragila: I have moved this non-answer to a comment so that krishnanem can pose it as a new question and can read your comment.
    – robjohn
    Sep 2 '12 at 20:39










  • @robjohn: I think Michael's comment would have been a more suitable choice over mine.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 21:44










  • @AsafKaragila: The point is to have krishnanem post the comment as a new question. Your comment solely addresses that point. Michael's also addresses the misplaced question and might encourage a reply.
    – robjohn
    Sep 3 '12 at 3:18


















  • You have used the assumption that the Cardinality of power set of R is equal to the Cardinality of functions from real to {0,1}. How to we prove that as well?
    – user39246
    Sep 2 '12 at 10:59










  • @krishnanem: Please ask new questions in a new thread, rather than as an answer to a previous question. Furthermore, this question was asked and answered several times before.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 11:17












  • @AsafKaragila: I have moved this non-answer to a comment so that krishnanem can pose it as a new question and can read your comment.
    – robjohn
    Sep 2 '12 at 20:39










  • @robjohn: I think Michael's comment would have been a more suitable choice over mine.
    – Asaf Karagila
    Sep 2 '12 at 21:44










  • @AsafKaragila: The point is to have krishnanem post the comment as a new question. Your comment solely addresses that point. Michael's also addresses the misplaced question and might encourage a reply.
    – robjohn
    Sep 3 '12 at 3:18
















You have used the assumption that the Cardinality of power set of R is equal to the Cardinality of functions from real to {0,1}. How to we prove that as well?
– user39246
Sep 2 '12 at 10:59




You have used the assumption that the Cardinality of power set of R is equal to the Cardinality of functions from real to {0,1}. How to we prove that as well?
– user39246
Sep 2 '12 at 10:59












@krishnanem: Please ask new questions in a new thread, rather than as an answer to a previous question. Furthermore, this question was asked and answered several times before.
– Asaf Karagila
Sep 2 '12 at 11:17






@krishnanem: Please ask new questions in a new thread, rather than as an answer to a previous question. Furthermore, this question was asked and answered several times before.
– Asaf Karagila
Sep 2 '12 at 11:17














@AsafKaragila: I have moved this non-answer to a comment so that krishnanem can pose it as a new question and can read your comment.
– robjohn
Sep 2 '12 at 20:39




@AsafKaragila: I have moved this non-answer to a comment so that krishnanem can pose it as a new question and can read your comment.
– robjohn
Sep 2 '12 at 20:39












@robjohn: I think Michael's comment would have been a more suitable choice over mine.
– Asaf Karagila
Sep 2 '12 at 21:44




@robjohn: I think Michael's comment would have been a more suitable choice over mine.
– Asaf Karagila
Sep 2 '12 at 21:44












@AsafKaragila: The point is to have krishnanem post the comment as a new question. Your comment solely addresses that point. Michael's also addresses the misplaced question and might encourage a reply.
– robjohn
Sep 3 '12 at 3:18




@AsafKaragila: The point is to have krishnanem post the comment as a new question. Your comment solely addresses that point. Michael's also addresses the misplaced question and might encourage a reply.
– robjohn
Sep 3 '12 at 3:18










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















38














All you need is a few basics of cardinal arithmetic: if $kappa$ and $lambda$ are cardinals, none of them zero, and at least one of them is infinite, then $kappa+lambda = kappalambda = max{kappa,lambda}$. And cardinal exponentiation satisfies some of the same laws as regular exponentiation; in particular, $(kappa^{lambda})^{nu} = kappa^{lambdanu}$.



The cardinality of the set of all real functions is then
$$|mathbb{R}|^{|mathbb{R}|} =mathfrak{c}^{mathfrak{c}} = (2^{aleph_0})^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{aleph_02^{aleph_0}} = 2^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{mathfrak{c}}.$$
In other words, it is equal to the cardinality of the power set of $mathbb{R}$.



With a few extra facts, you can get more. In general, if $kappa$ is an infinite cardinal, and $2leqlambdaleqkappa$, then $lambda^{kappa}=2^{kappa}$. This follows because:
$$2^{kappa} leq lambda^{kappa} leq (2^{lambda})^{kappa} = 2^{lambdakappa} = 2^{kappa},$$
so you get equality throughout. The extra information you need for this is to know that if $kappa$, $lambda$, and $nu$ are nonzero cardinals, $kappaleqlambda$, then $kappa^{nu}leq lambda^{nu}$.



In particular, for any infinite cardinal $kappa$ you have $kappa^{kappa} = 2^{kappa}$.






share|cite|improve this answer































    29














    I guess that you know that $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}|$ and thus $|mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$



    This means that $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Since $fcolonmathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ is an element of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ you have that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ (all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself) is of cardinality less or equal to the one of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ which in turn means that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}|le |P(mathbb{R})|$.



    Now, since $|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$ which is the set of all functions from $mathbb{R}$ to ${0,1}$, and clearly every function from $mathbb{R}$ into ${0,1}$ is in particular a function from $mathbb{R}$ into itself, we have:
    $$|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}| le |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R})|$$



    So all in all we have that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| = |P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$.






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 2




      Did you mean $|P(mathbb{R})|$ at the end of your second paragraph?
      – Arturo Magidin
      Jan 17 '11 at 23:51






    • 2




      @AsafKaraglia: Could you please detail how and why $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$ and $ mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R} $ $Longrightarrow |P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$? I made an incidental edits which I hope will help and referenced math.stackexchange.com/questions/29366/….
      – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
      Nov 7 '13 at 1:10








    • 1




      @LePressentiment: Don't add color to my posts. Thank you.
      – Asaf Karagila
      Nov 7 '13 at 5:36






    • 2




      @AsafKaragila: No problem at all. I'll post my edition separately below. In your previous version (rollback) above, you write that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ = all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself. Should this be the set of all such functions? Also, will you please to let me know of my previous comment, preceding your comment?
      – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
      Nov 7 '13 at 9:48










    • @LePressentiment: I don't know what you mean by that. $|A|=|B|$ implies that $|mathcal P(A)|=|mathcal P(B)|$. That's a simple exercise in the definition of cardinalities. And yes $A^B$ is the set of all functions from $B$ into $A$, although it is sometimes denoted by ${}^BA$.
      – Asaf Karagila
      Nov 7 '13 at 10:02





















    3














    This answer is based on, but differs slightly from, user Asaf Karaglia's above.





    First, observe that by definition, ${text{all real functions of real variable}}:= {f: ; f: mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}} := mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$.



    The question is about $|{text{all real functions of real variable}}|$, so examine an arbitrary real function of real variable: $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}.$

    By inspection, $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R} := {(r, f(r)) : r in mathbb{R}} quad subseteq quad P(mathbb{R} times mathbb{R})$.

    Thus, $color{green}{|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|}$.



    Before continuing, let's try to simplify $|P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Observe that $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^k| , forall , k in mathbb{N}$. Its proof by mathematical induction requires the induction hypothesis of $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^2|$, one proof of which is : $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}| implies |mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$.



    Verily, $mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}^2$. Howbeit, for infinite sets $A,B$: $|A| = |B| Longrightarrow require{cancel} cancel{Longleftarrow} |P(A)| = |P(B)|$.

    (The converse is discussed here.)



    Thus, $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| implies color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$. Now scrutinise $|P(mathbb{R})|$:



    ● $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^{mathbb{R}}|}$, where $2^{mathbb{R}} := {f : ; f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}}$,

    ● Every $f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}$ is a particular case of a function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$, thus $color{#EC5021}{2^{mathbb{R}} subsetneq mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}}$.



    Altogether, $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| =} color{#EC5021}{|2^mathbb{R}| le} color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$



    $implies |P(mathbb{R})| qquad qquad quad leq |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| leq |P(mathbb{R})| implies color{#A9057D}{underbrace{|P(mathbb{R})|}_{= |2^mathbb{R}|}} = |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| $.






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • Downvoters, pursuant to my edit, please let me know of further sugggestions which would be more instructive than a mere downvote.
      – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
      Nov 8 '13 at 7:35






    • 4




      Use less colors, so people with disabilities could read this without getting a headache.
      – Asaf Karagila
      Nov 8 '13 at 8:31



















    2














    This is irrelevent here, still it is 'relevent'. The cardinality of set of all continuous function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ $(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ is $2 ^ mathbb{N_0} = mathfrak{c}$ because any such function is determined by its value on rationals. hence #$(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ = # $mathbb{R}^mathbb{Q}$ which has cardinality $2^mathbb{N_0}$.






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • Yes, it's relevant, because it sets a lower bound on the cardinality of the question, i.e., $|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| geq |mathbb{R}| = mathfrak{c}$. Moreover, it is a nice, easy-to-understand, result :)
      – loved.by.Jesus
      Apr 29 '17 at 21:48













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f17914%2fcardinality-of-the-set-of-all-real-functions-of-real-variable%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    38














    All you need is a few basics of cardinal arithmetic: if $kappa$ and $lambda$ are cardinals, none of them zero, and at least one of them is infinite, then $kappa+lambda = kappalambda = max{kappa,lambda}$. And cardinal exponentiation satisfies some of the same laws as regular exponentiation; in particular, $(kappa^{lambda})^{nu} = kappa^{lambdanu}$.



    The cardinality of the set of all real functions is then
    $$|mathbb{R}|^{|mathbb{R}|} =mathfrak{c}^{mathfrak{c}} = (2^{aleph_0})^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{aleph_02^{aleph_0}} = 2^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{mathfrak{c}}.$$
    In other words, it is equal to the cardinality of the power set of $mathbb{R}$.



    With a few extra facts, you can get more. In general, if $kappa$ is an infinite cardinal, and $2leqlambdaleqkappa$, then $lambda^{kappa}=2^{kappa}$. This follows because:
    $$2^{kappa} leq lambda^{kappa} leq (2^{lambda})^{kappa} = 2^{lambdakappa} = 2^{kappa},$$
    so you get equality throughout. The extra information you need for this is to know that if $kappa$, $lambda$, and $nu$ are nonzero cardinals, $kappaleqlambda$, then $kappa^{nu}leq lambda^{nu}$.



    In particular, for any infinite cardinal $kappa$ you have $kappa^{kappa} = 2^{kappa}$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      38














      All you need is a few basics of cardinal arithmetic: if $kappa$ and $lambda$ are cardinals, none of them zero, and at least one of them is infinite, then $kappa+lambda = kappalambda = max{kappa,lambda}$. And cardinal exponentiation satisfies some of the same laws as regular exponentiation; in particular, $(kappa^{lambda})^{nu} = kappa^{lambdanu}$.



      The cardinality of the set of all real functions is then
      $$|mathbb{R}|^{|mathbb{R}|} =mathfrak{c}^{mathfrak{c}} = (2^{aleph_0})^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{aleph_02^{aleph_0}} = 2^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{mathfrak{c}}.$$
      In other words, it is equal to the cardinality of the power set of $mathbb{R}$.



      With a few extra facts, you can get more. In general, if $kappa$ is an infinite cardinal, and $2leqlambdaleqkappa$, then $lambda^{kappa}=2^{kappa}$. This follows because:
      $$2^{kappa} leq lambda^{kappa} leq (2^{lambda})^{kappa} = 2^{lambdakappa} = 2^{kappa},$$
      so you get equality throughout. The extra information you need for this is to know that if $kappa$, $lambda$, and $nu$ are nonzero cardinals, $kappaleqlambda$, then $kappa^{nu}leq lambda^{nu}$.



      In particular, for any infinite cardinal $kappa$ you have $kappa^{kappa} = 2^{kappa}$.






      share|cite|improve this answer


























        38












        38








        38






        All you need is a few basics of cardinal arithmetic: if $kappa$ and $lambda$ are cardinals, none of them zero, and at least one of them is infinite, then $kappa+lambda = kappalambda = max{kappa,lambda}$. And cardinal exponentiation satisfies some of the same laws as regular exponentiation; in particular, $(kappa^{lambda})^{nu} = kappa^{lambdanu}$.



        The cardinality of the set of all real functions is then
        $$|mathbb{R}|^{|mathbb{R}|} =mathfrak{c}^{mathfrak{c}} = (2^{aleph_0})^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{aleph_02^{aleph_0}} = 2^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{mathfrak{c}}.$$
        In other words, it is equal to the cardinality of the power set of $mathbb{R}$.



        With a few extra facts, you can get more. In general, if $kappa$ is an infinite cardinal, and $2leqlambdaleqkappa$, then $lambda^{kappa}=2^{kappa}$. This follows because:
        $$2^{kappa} leq lambda^{kappa} leq (2^{lambda})^{kappa} = 2^{lambdakappa} = 2^{kappa},$$
        so you get equality throughout. The extra information you need for this is to know that if $kappa$, $lambda$, and $nu$ are nonzero cardinals, $kappaleqlambda$, then $kappa^{nu}leq lambda^{nu}$.



        In particular, for any infinite cardinal $kappa$ you have $kappa^{kappa} = 2^{kappa}$.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        All you need is a few basics of cardinal arithmetic: if $kappa$ and $lambda$ are cardinals, none of them zero, and at least one of them is infinite, then $kappa+lambda = kappalambda = max{kappa,lambda}$. And cardinal exponentiation satisfies some of the same laws as regular exponentiation; in particular, $(kappa^{lambda})^{nu} = kappa^{lambdanu}$.



        The cardinality of the set of all real functions is then
        $$|mathbb{R}|^{|mathbb{R}|} =mathfrak{c}^{mathfrak{c}} = (2^{aleph_0})^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{aleph_02^{aleph_0}} = 2^{2^{aleph_0}} = 2^{mathfrak{c}}.$$
        In other words, it is equal to the cardinality of the power set of $mathbb{R}$.



        With a few extra facts, you can get more. In general, if $kappa$ is an infinite cardinal, and $2leqlambdaleqkappa$, then $lambda^{kappa}=2^{kappa}$. This follows because:
        $$2^{kappa} leq lambda^{kappa} leq (2^{lambda})^{kappa} = 2^{lambdakappa} = 2^{kappa},$$
        so you get equality throughout. The extra information you need for this is to know that if $kappa$, $lambda$, and $nu$ are nonzero cardinals, $kappaleqlambda$, then $kappa^{nu}leq lambda^{nu}$.



        In particular, for any infinite cardinal $kappa$ you have $kappa^{kappa} = 2^{kappa}$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Jan 17 '11 at 23:43

























        answered Jan 17 '11 at 23:32









        Arturo Magidin

        260k32584904




        260k32584904























            29














            I guess that you know that $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}|$ and thus $|mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$



            This means that $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Since $fcolonmathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ is an element of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ you have that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ (all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself) is of cardinality less or equal to the one of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ which in turn means that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}|le |P(mathbb{R})|$.



            Now, since $|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$ which is the set of all functions from $mathbb{R}$ to ${0,1}$, and clearly every function from $mathbb{R}$ into ${0,1}$ is in particular a function from $mathbb{R}$ into itself, we have:
            $$|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}| le |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R})|$$



            So all in all we have that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| = |P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$.






            share|cite|improve this answer



















            • 2




              Did you mean $|P(mathbb{R})|$ at the end of your second paragraph?
              – Arturo Magidin
              Jan 17 '11 at 23:51






            • 2




              @AsafKaraglia: Could you please detail how and why $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$ and $ mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R} $ $Longrightarrow |P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$? I made an incidental edits which I hope will help and referenced math.stackexchange.com/questions/29366/….
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 1:10








            • 1




              @LePressentiment: Don't add color to my posts. Thank you.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 5:36






            • 2




              @AsafKaragila: No problem at all. I'll post my edition separately below. In your previous version (rollback) above, you write that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ = all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself. Should this be the set of all such functions? Also, will you please to let me know of my previous comment, preceding your comment?
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 9:48










            • @LePressentiment: I don't know what you mean by that. $|A|=|B|$ implies that $|mathcal P(A)|=|mathcal P(B)|$. That's a simple exercise in the definition of cardinalities. And yes $A^B$ is the set of all functions from $B$ into $A$, although it is sometimes denoted by ${}^BA$.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 10:02


















            29














            I guess that you know that $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}|$ and thus $|mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$



            This means that $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Since $fcolonmathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ is an element of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ you have that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ (all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself) is of cardinality less or equal to the one of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ which in turn means that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}|le |P(mathbb{R})|$.



            Now, since $|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$ which is the set of all functions from $mathbb{R}$ to ${0,1}$, and clearly every function from $mathbb{R}$ into ${0,1}$ is in particular a function from $mathbb{R}$ into itself, we have:
            $$|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}| le |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R})|$$



            So all in all we have that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| = |P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$.






            share|cite|improve this answer



















            • 2




              Did you mean $|P(mathbb{R})|$ at the end of your second paragraph?
              – Arturo Magidin
              Jan 17 '11 at 23:51






            • 2




              @AsafKaraglia: Could you please detail how and why $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$ and $ mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R} $ $Longrightarrow |P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$? I made an incidental edits which I hope will help and referenced math.stackexchange.com/questions/29366/….
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 1:10








            • 1




              @LePressentiment: Don't add color to my posts. Thank you.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 5:36






            • 2




              @AsafKaragila: No problem at all. I'll post my edition separately below. In your previous version (rollback) above, you write that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ = all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself. Should this be the set of all such functions? Also, will you please to let me know of my previous comment, preceding your comment?
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 9:48










            • @LePressentiment: I don't know what you mean by that. $|A|=|B|$ implies that $|mathcal P(A)|=|mathcal P(B)|$. That's a simple exercise in the definition of cardinalities. And yes $A^B$ is the set of all functions from $B$ into $A$, although it is sometimes denoted by ${}^BA$.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 10:02
















            29












            29








            29






            I guess that you know that $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}|$ and thus $|mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$



            This means that $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Since $fcolonmathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ is an element of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ you have that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ (all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself) is of cardinality less or equal to the one of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ which in turn means that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}|le |P(mathbb{R})|$.



            Now, since $|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$ which is the set of all functions from $mathbb{R}$ to ${0,1}$, and clearly every function from $mathbb{R}$ into ${0,1}$ is in particular a function from $mathbb{R}$ into itself, we have:
            $$|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}| le |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R})|$$



            So all in all we have that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| = |P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            I guess that you know that $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}|$ and thus $|mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$



            This means that $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Since $fcolonmathbb{R}tomathbb{R}$ is an element of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ you have that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ (all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself) is of cardinality less or equal to the one of $P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})$ which in turn means that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}|le |P(mathbb{R})|$.



            Now, since $|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$ which is the set of all functions from $mathbb{R}$ to ${0,1}$, and clearly every function from $mathbb{R}$ into ${0,1}$ is in particular a function from $mathbb{R}$ into itself, we have:
            $$|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}| le |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R})|$$



            So all in all we have that $|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| = |P(mathbb{R})| = |2^mathbb{R}|$.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Nov 7 '13 at 5:35

























            answered Jan 17 '11 at 23:45









            Asaf Karagila

            301k32422755




            301k32422755








            • 2




              Did you mean $|P(mathbb{R})|$ at the end of your second paragraph?
              – Arturo Magidin
              Jan 17 '11 at 23:51






            • 2




              @AsafKaraglia: Could you please detail how and why $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$ and $ mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R} $ $Longrightarrow |P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$? I made an incidental edits which I hope will help and referenced math.stackexchange.com/questions/29366/….
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 1:10








            • 1




              @LePressentiment: Don't add color to my posts. Thank you.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 5:36






            • 2




              @AsafKaragila: No problem at all. I'll post my edition separately below. In your previous version (rollback) above, you write that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ = all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself. Should this be the set of all such functions? Also, will you please to let me know of my previous comment, preceding your comment?
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 9:48










            • @LePressentiment: I don't know what you mean by that. $|A|=|B|$ implies that $|mathcal P(A)|=|mathcal P(B)|$. That's a simple exercise in the definition of cardinalities. And yes $A^B$ is the set of all functions from $B$ into $A$, although it is sometimes denoted by ${}^BA$.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 10:02
















            • 2




              Did you mean $|P(mathbb{R})|$ at the end of your second paragraph?
              – Arturo Magidin
              Jan 17 '11 at 23:51






            • 2




              @AsafKaraglia: Could you please detail how and why $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$ and $ mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R} $ $Longrightarrow |P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$? I made an incidental edits which I hope will help and referenced math.stackexchange.com/questions/29366/….
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 1:10








            • 1




              @LePressentiment: Don't add color to my posts. Thank you.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 5:36






            • 2




              @AsafKaragila: No problem at all. I'll post my edition separately below. In your previous version (rollback) above, you write that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ = all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself. Should this be the set of all such functions? Also, will you please to let me know of my previous comment, preceding your comment?
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 7 '13 at 9:48










            • @LePressentiment: I don't know what you mean by that. $|A|=|B|$ implies that $|mathcal P(A)|=|mathcal P(B)|$. That's a simple exercise in the definition of cardinalities. And yes $A^B$ is the set of all functions from $B$ into $A$, although it is sometimes denoted by ${}^BA$.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 7 '13 at 10:02










            2




            2




            Did you mean $|P(mathbb{R})|$ at the end of your second paragraph?
            – Arturo Magidin
            Jan 17 '11 at 23:51




            Did you mean $|P(mathbb{R})|$ at the end of your second paragraph?
            – Arturo Magidin
            Jan 17 '11 at 23:51




            2




            2




            @AsafKaraglia: Could you please detail how and why $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$ and $ mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R} $ $Longrightarrow |P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$? I made an incidental edits which I hope will help and referenced math.stackexchange.com/questions/29366/….
            – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
            Nov 7 '13 at 1:10






            @AsafKaraglia: Could you please detail how and why $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$ and $ mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R} $ $Longrightarrow |P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$? I made an incidental edits which I hope will help and referenced math.stackexchange.com/questions/29366/….
            – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
            Nov 7 '13 at 1:10






            1




            1




            @LePressentiment: Don't add color to my posts. Thank you.
            – Asaf Karagila
            Nov 7 '13 at 5:36




            @LePressentiment: Don't add color to my posts. Thank you.
            – Asaf Karagila
            Nov 7 '13 at 5:36




            2




            2




            @AsafKaragila: No problem at all. I'll post my edition separately below. In your previous version (rollback) above, you write that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ = all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself. Should this be the set of all such functions? Also, will you please to let me know of my previous comment, preceding your comment?
            – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
            Nov 7 '13 at 9:48




            @AsafKaragila: No problem at all. I'll post my edition separately below. In your previous version (rollback) above, you write that $mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$ = all the functions from $mathbb{R}$ to itself. Should this be the set of all such functions? Also, will you please to let me know of my previous comment, preceding your comment?
            – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
            Nov 7 '13 at 9:48












            @LePressentiment: I don't know what you mean by that. $|A|=|B|$ implies that $|mathcal P(A)|=|mathcal P(B)|$. That's a simple exercise in the definition of cardinalities. And yes $A^B$ is the set of all functions from $B$ into $A$, although it is sometimes denoted by ${}^BA$.
            – Asaf Karagila
            Nov 7 '13 at 10:02






            @LePressentiment: I don't know what you mean by that. $|A|=|B|$ implies that $|mathcal P(A)|=|mathcal P(B)|$. That's a simple exercise in the definition of cardinalities. And yes $A^B$ is the set of all functions from $B$ into $A$, although it is sometimes denoted by ${}^BA$.
            – Asaf Karagila
            Nov 7 '13 at 10:02













            3














            This answer is based on, but differs slightly from, user Asaf Karaglia's above.





            First, observe that by definition, ${text{all real functions of real variable}}:= {f: ; f: mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}} := mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$.



            The question is about $|{text{all real functions of real variable}}|$, so examine an arbitrary real function of real variable: $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}.$

            By inspection, $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R} := {(r, f(r)) : r in mathbb{R}} quad subseteq quad P(mathbb{R} times mathbb{R})$.

            Thus, $color{green}{|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|}$.



            Before continuing, let's try to simplify $|P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Observe that $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^k| , forall , k in mathbb{N}$. Its proof by mathematical induction requires the induction hypothesis of $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^2|$, one proof of which is : $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}| implies |mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$.



            Verily, $mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}^2$. Howbeit, for infinite sets $A,B$: $|A| = |B| Longrightarrow require{cancel} cancel{Longleftarrow} |P(A)| = |P(B)|$.

            (The converse is discussed here.)



            Thus, $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| implies color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$. Now scrutinise $|P(mathbb{R})|$:



            ● $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^{mathbb{R}}|}$, where $2^{mathbb{R}} := {f : ; f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}}$,

            ● Every $f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}$ is a particular case of a function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$, thus $color{#EC5021}{2^{mathbb{R}} subsetneq mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}}$.



            Altogether, $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| =} color{#EC5021}{|2^mathbb{R}| le} color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$



            $implies |P(mathbb{R})| qquad qquad quad leq |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| leq |P(mathbb{R})| implies color{#A9057D}{underbrace{|P(mathbb{R})|}_{= |2^mathbb{R}|}} = |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| $.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • Downvoters, pursuant to my edit, please let me know of further sugggestions which would be more instructive than a mere downvote.
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 8 '13 at 7:35






            • 4




              Use less colors, so people with disabilities could read this without getting a headache.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 8 '13 at 8:31
















            3














            This answer is based on, but differs slightly from, user Asaf Karaglia's above.





            First, observe that by definition, ${text{all real functions of real variable}}:= {f: ; f: mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}} := mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$.



            The question is about $|{text{all real functions of real variable}}|$, so examine an arbitrary real function of real variable: $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}.$

            By inspection, $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R} := {(r, f(r)) : r in mathbb{R}} quad subseteq quad P(mathbb{R} times mathbb{R})$.

            Thus, $color{green}{|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|}$.



            Before continuing, let's try to simplify $|P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Observe that $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^k| , forall , k in mathbb{N}$. Its proof by mathematical induction requires the induction hypothesis of $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^2|$, one proof of which is : $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}| implies |mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$.



            Verily, $mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}^2$. Howbeit, for infinite sets $A,B$: $|A| = |B| Longrightarrow require{cancel} cancel{Longleftarrow} |P(A)| = |P(B)|$.

            (The converse is discussed here.)



            Thus, $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| implies color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$. Now scrutinise $|P(mathbb{R})|$:



            ● $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^{mathbb{R}}|}$, where $2^{mathbb{R}} := {f : ; f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}}$,

            ● Every $f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}$ is a particular case of a function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$, thus $color{#EC5021}{2^{mathbb{R}} subsetneq mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}}$.



            Altogether, $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| =} color{#EC5021}{|2^mathbb{R}| le} color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$



            $implies |P(mathbb{R})| qquad qquad quad leq |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| leq |P(mathbb{R})| implies color{#A9057D}{underbrace{|P(mathbb{R})|}_{= |2^mathbb{R}|}} = |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| $.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • Downvoters, pursuant to my edit, please let me know of further sugggestions which would be more instructive than a mere downvote.
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 8 '13 at 7:35






            • 4




              Use less colors, so people with disabilities could read this without getting a headache.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 8 '13 at 8:31














            3












            3








            3






            This answer is based on, but differs slightly from, user Asaf Karaglia's above.





            First, observe that by definition, ${text{all real functions of real variable}}:= {f: ; f: mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}} := mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$.



            The question is about $|{text{all real functions of real variable}}|$, so examine an arbitrary real function of real variable: $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}.$

            By inspection, $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R} := {(r, f(r)) : r in mathbb{R}} quad subseteq quad P(mathbb{R} times mathbb{R})$.

            Thus, $color{green}{|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|}$.



            Before continuing, let's try to simplify $|P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Observe that $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^k| , forall , k in mathbb{N}$. Its proof by mathematical induction requires the induction hypothesis of $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^2|$, one proof of which is : $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}| implies |mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$.



            Verily, $mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}^2$. Howbeit, for infinite sets $A,B$: $|A| = |B| Longrightarrow require{cancel} cancel{Longleftarrow} |P(A)| = |P(B)|$.

            (The converse is discussed here.)



            Thus, $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| implies color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$. Now scrutinise $|P(mathbb{R})|$:



            ● $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^{mathbb{R}}|}$, where $2^{mathbb{R}} := {f : ; f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}}$,

            ● Every $f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}$ is a particular case of a function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$, thus $color{#EC5021}{2^{mathbb{R}} subsetneq mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}}$.



            Altogether, $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| =} color{#EC5021}{|2^mathbb{R}| le} color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$



            $implies |P(mathbb{R})| qquad qquad quad leq |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| leq |P(mathbb{R})| implies color{#A9057D}{underbrace{|P(mathbb{R})|}_{= |2^mathbb{R}|}} = |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| $.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            This answer is based on, but differs slightly from, user Asaf Karaglia's above.





            First, observe that by definition, ${text{all real functions of real variable}}:= {f: ; f: mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}} := mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}$.



            The question is about $|{text{all real functions of real variable}}|$, so examine an arbitrary real function of real variable: $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R}.$

            By inspection, $f,colon,mathbb{R}tomathbb{R} := {(r, f(r)) : r in mathbb{R}} quad subseteq quad P(mathbb{R} times mathbb{R})$.

            Thus, $color{green}{|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|}$.



            Before continuing, let's try to simplify $|P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|$. Observe that $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^k| , forall , k in mathbb{N}$. Its proof by mathematical induction requires the induction hypothesis of $|mathbb{R}| = |mathbb{R}^2|$, one proof of which is : $|mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}| implies |mathbb{R}| = |2^{mathbb{N}}| = |2^{mathbb{N}timesmathbb{N}}| = |2^mathbb{N}times 2^mathbb{N}| = |mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R}|$.



            Verily, $mathbb{R} neq mathbb{R}^2$. Howbeit, for infinite sets $A,B$: $|A| = |B| Longrightarrow require{cancel} cancel{Longleftarrow} |P(A)| = |P(B)|$.

            (The converse is discussed here.)



            Thus, $|P(mathbb{R})| = |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})| implies color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$. Now scrutinise $|P(mathbb{R})|$:



            ● $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| = |2^{mathbb{R}}|}$, where $2^{mathbb{R}} := {f : ; f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}}$,

            ● Every $f: mathbb{R} to {0,1}$ is a particular case of a function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$, thus $color{#EC5021}{2^{mathbb{R}} subsetneq mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}}$.



            Altogether, $color{#A9057D}{|P(mathbb{R})| =} color{#EC5021}{|2^mathbb{R}| le} color{green}{|mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| le |P(mathbb{R}timesmathbb{R})|} = |P(mathbb{R})|$



            $implies |P(mathbb{R})| qquad qquad quad leq |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| leq |P(mathbb{R})| implies color{#A9057D}{underbrace{|P(mathbb{R})|}_{= |2^mathbb{R}|}} = |mathbb{R}^mathbb{R}| $.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:19









            Community

            1




            1










            answered Nov 7 '13 at 9:49









            Greek - Area 51 Proposal

            3,155669103




            3,155669103












            • Downvoters, pursuant to my edit, please let me know of further sugggestions which would be more instructive than a mere downvote.
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 8 '13 at 7:35






            • 4




              Use less colors, so people with disabilities could read this without getting a headache.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 8 '13 at 8:31


















            • Downvoters, pursuant to my edit, please let me know of further sugggestions which would be more instructive than a mere downvote.
              – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
              Nov 8 '13 at 7:35






            • 4




              Use less colors, so people with disabilities could read this without getting a headache.
              – Asaf Karagila
              Nov 8 '13 at 8:31
















            Downvoters, pursuant to my edit, please let me know of further sugggestions which would be more instructive than a mere downvote.
            – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
            Nov 8 '13 at 7:35




            Downvoters, pursuant to my edit, please let me know of further sugggestions which would be more instructive than a mere downvote.
            – Greek - Area 51 Proposal
            Nov 8 '13 at 7:35




            4




            4




            Use less colors, so people with disabilities could read this without getting a headache.
            – Asaf Karagila
            Nov 8 '13 at 8:31




            Use less colors, so people with disabilities could read this without getting a headache.
            – Asaf Karagila
            Nov 8 '13 at 8:31











            2














            This is irrelevent here, still it is 'relevent'. The cardinality of set of all continuous function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ $(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ is $2 ^ mathbb{N_0} = mathfrak{c}$ because any such function is determined by its value on rationals. hence #$(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ = # $mathbb{R}^mathbb{Q}$ which has cardinality $2^mathbb{N_0}$.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • Yes, it's relevant, because it sets a lower bound on the cardinality of the question, i.e., $|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| geq |mathbb{R}| = mathfrak{c}$. Moreover, it is a nice, easy-to-understand, result :)
              – loved.by.Jesus
              Apr 29 '17 at 21:48


















            2














            This is irrelevent here, still it is 'relevent'. The cardinality of set of all continuous function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ $(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ is $2 ^ mathbb{N_0} = mathfrak{c}$ because any such function is determined by its value on rationals. hence #$(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ = # $mathbb{R}^mathbb{Q}$ which has cardinality $2^mathbb{N_0}$.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • Yes, it's relevant, because it sets a lower bound on the cardinality of the question, i.e., $|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| geq |mathbb{R}| = mathfrak{c}$. Moreover, it is a nice, easy-to-understand, result :)
              – loved.by.Jesus
              Apr 29 '17 at 21:48
















            2












            2








            2






            This is irrelevent here, still it is 'relevent'. The cardinality of set of all continuous function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ $(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ is $2 ^ mathbb{N_0} = mathfrak{c}$ because any such function is determined by its value on rationals. hence #$(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ = # $mathbb{R}^mathbb{Q}$ which has cardinality $2^mathbb{N_0}$.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            This is irrelevent here, still it is 'relevent'. The cardinality of set of all continuous function from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ $(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ is $2 ^ mathbb{N_0} = mathfrak{c}$ because any such function is determined by its value on rationals. hence #$(C(mathbb{R},mathbb{R}))$ = # $mathbb{R}^mathbb{Q}$ which has cardinality $2^mathbb{N_0}$.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Apr 29 '17 at 22:03









            loved.by.Jesus

            1319




            1319










            answered Nov 7 '13 at 6:14









            GA316

            2,6381132




            2,6381132












            • Yes, it's relevant, because it sets a lower bound on the cardinality of the question, i.e., $|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| geq |mathbb{R}| = mathfrak{c}$. Moreover, it is a nice, easy-to-understand, result :)
              – loved.by.Jesus
              Apr 29 '17 at 21:48




















            • Yes, it's relevant, because it sets a lower bound on the cardinality of the question, i.e., $|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| geq |mathbb{R}| = mathfrak{c}$. Moreover, it is a nice, easy-to-understand, result :)
              – loved.by.Jesus
              Apr 29 '17 at 21:48


















            Yes, it's relevant, because it sets a lower bound on the cardinality of the question, i.e., $|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| geq |mathbb{R}| = mathfrak{c}$. Moreover, it is a nice, easy-to-understand, result :)
            – loved.by.Jesus
            Apr 29 '17 at 21:48






            Yes, it's relevant, because it sets a lower bound on the cardinality of the question, i.e., $|mathbb{R}^{mathbb{R}}| geq |mathbb{R}| = mathfrak{c}$. Moreover, it is a nice, easy-to-understand, result :)
            – loved.by.Jesus
            Apr 29 '17 at 21:48




















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f17914%2fcardinality-of-the-set-of-all-real-functions-of-real-variable%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Plaza Victoria

            In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

            How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...