What are the properties of countably infinite sets compared to sets of higher cardinality?












4












$begingroup$


When looking at mathematical definitions, there are quite a few cases where we limit certain properties to countably infinite sets (e.g. $sigma$-Algebras).



In some cases we set this limit as we'd lose our intuition of what would happen if we chose an even bigger infinity, in other cases there are hard facts at work.



Yet, the only property of countably infinite sets that comes to my mind is ... well, that they are countable, and the higher cardinalities are not.



I'm sure though that there are many more characteristic properties of countably infinite sets that get lost when moving up to higher cardinalities - so what are they?






elementary-set-theory cardinals







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    4












    $begingroup$


    When looking at mathematical definitions, there are quite a few cases where we limit certain properties to countably infinite sets (e.g. $sigma$-Algebras).



    In some cases we set this limit as we'd lose our intuition of what would happen if we chose an even bigger infinity, in other cases there are hard facts at work.



    Yet, the only property of countably infinite sets that comes to my mind is ... well, that they are countable, and the higher cardinalities are not.



    I'm sure though that there are many more characteristic properties of countably infinite sets that get lost when moving up to higher cardinalities - so what are they?






    elementary-set-theory cardinals







    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      4












      4








      4


      1



      $begingroup$


      When looking at mathematical definitions, there are quite a few cases where we limit certain properties to countably infinite sets (e.g. $sigma$-Algebras).



      In some cases we set this limit as we'd lose our intuition of what would happen if we chose an even bigger infinity, in other cases there are hard facts at work.



      Yet, the only property of countably infinite sets that comes to my mind is ... well, that they are countable, and the higher cardinalities are not.



      I'm sure though that there are many more characteristic properties of countably infinite sets that get lost when moving up to higher cardinalities - so what are they?






      elementary-set-theory cardinals







      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      When looking at mathematical definitions, there are quite a few cases where we limit certain properties to countably infinite sets (e.g. $sigma$-Algebras).



      In some cases we set this limit as we'd lose our intuition of what would happen if we chose an even bigger infinity, in other cases there are hard facts at work.



      Yet, the only property of countably infinite sets that comes to my mind is ... well, that they are countable, and the higher cardinalities are not.



      I'm sure though that there are many more characteristic properties of countably infinite sets that get lost when moving up to higher cardinalities - so what are they?






      elementary-set-theory cardinals




      elementary-set-theory cardinals






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 3 '18 at 19:22









      SudixSudix

      8781316




      8781316






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6












          $begingroup$

          There are a lot of combinatorial properties you lose. For example:




          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies infinite Ramsey's theorem for pairs: if $c:[mathbb{N}]^2rightarrow {0,1}$ is a $2$-coloring of pairs of natural numbers, then there is a $c$-homogeneous set $H$ (that is, $c({x,y})=c({x',y'})$ for all $xnot=y, x'not=y'$ in $H$) of the same size as $mathbb{N}$. This fails in general for uncountable sets: if $X$ is uncountable, there may be a $2$-coloring of pairs of elements of $X$ with no size-$X$ homogeneous set. In fact, this fails for most uncountable cardinalities in a precise sense (see below), and provably fails of $aleph_1$ (and indeed any uncountable $kappale 2^{aleph_0}$) in particular: fix an injection $i:aleph_1rightarrowmathbb{R}$, and consider the coloring $$c:[aleph_1]^2rightarrow{0,1}: c({x,y}=1iff (x<_{aleph_1}yiff i(x)<_mathbb{R}i(y)))$$ (with the two different orderings "decorated" for clarity). - it's not hard to show, using the separability (= countable dense subset) of $mathbb{R}$, that $c$ cannot have an uncountable homogeneous set.


          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies Konig's lemma: any infinite-height, finitely-branching tree has an infinite path. The "$kappa$-version" of this property, for an arbitrary infinite cardinal $kappa$, should be: "Any $<kappa$-branching tree of height $kappa$ has a $kappa$-length branch," but this too breaks down in general for uncountable sets, and in particular is again provably false for $aleph_1$.



          Combinatorial properties of $mathbb{N}$ in general are very special, and often correspond to large cardinal properties when lifted to the uncountable setting. For example, it is consistent with ZFC that only $aleph_0$ has the Ramsey property above.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Another special property of $aleph_0$ is that of being inaccessible in the sense that it cannot be obtained from smaller cardinals by the usual operations of cardinal arithmetic. The existence of inaccessible cardinals larger than $aleph_0$ cannot be proved in ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent).
            $endgroup$
            – mlerma54
            Dec 3 '18 at 20:09











          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%2f3024543%2fwhat-are-the-properties-of-countably-infinite-sets-compared-to-sets-of-higher-ca%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          6












          $begingroup$

          There are a lot of combinatorial properties you lose. For example:




          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies infinite Ramsey's theorem for pairs: if $c:[mathbb{N}]^2rightarrow {0,1}$ is a $2$-coloring of pairs of natural numbers, then there is a $c$-homogeneous set $H$ (that is, $c({x,y})=c({x',y'})$ for all $xnot=y, x'not=y'$ in $H$) of the same size as $mathbb{N}$. This fails in general for uncountable sets: if $X$ is uncountable, there may be a $2$-coloring of pairs of elements of $X$ with no size-$X$ homogeneous set. In fact, this fails for most uncountable cardinalities in a precise sense (see below), and provably fails of $aleph_1$ (and indeed any uncountable $kappale 2^{aleph_0}$) in particular: fix an injection $i:aleph_1rightarrowmathbb{R}$, and consider the coloring $$c:[aleph_1]^2rightarrow{0,1}: c({x,y}=1iff (x<_{aleph_1}yiff i(x)<_mathbb{R}i(y)))$$ (with the two different orderings "decorated" for clarity). - it's not hard to show, using the separability (= countable dense subset) of $mathbb{R}$, that $c$ cannot have an uncountable homogeneous set.


          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies Konig's lemma: any infinite-height, finitely-branching tree has an infinite path. The "$kappa$-version" of this property, for an arbitrary infinite cardinal $kappa$, should be: "Any $<kappa$-branching tree of height $kappa$ has a $kappa$-length branch," but this too breaks down in general for uncountable sets, and in particular is again provably false for $aleph_1$.



          Combinatorial properties of $mathbb{N}$ in general are very special, and often correspond to large cardinal properties when lifted to the uncountable setting. For example, it is consistent with ZFC that only $aleph_0$ has the Ramsey property above.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Another special property of $aleph_0$ is that of being inaccessible in the sense that it cannot be obtained from smaller cardinals by the usual operations of cardinal arithmetic. The existence of inaccessible cardinals larger than $aleph_0$ cannot be proved in ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent).
            $endgroup$
            – mlerma54
            Dec 3 '18 at 20:09
















          6












          $begingroup$

          There are a lot of combinatorial properties you lose. For example:




          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies infinite Ramsey's theorem for pairs: if $c:[mathbb{N}]^2rightarrow {0,1}$ is a $2$-coloring of pairs of natural numbers, then there is a $c$-homogeneous set $H$ (that is, $c({x,y})=c({x',y'})$ for all $xnot=y, x'not=y'$ in $H$) of the same size as $mathbb{N}$. This fails in general for uncountable sets: if $X$ is uncountable, there may be a $2$-coloring of pairs of elements of $X$ with no size-$X$ homogeneous set. In fact, this fails for most uncountable cardinalities in a precise sense (see below), and provably fails of $aleph_1$ (and indeed any uncountable $kappale 2^{aleph_0}$) in particular: fix an injection $i:aleph_1rightarrowmathbb{R}$, and consider the coloring $$c:[aleph_1]^2rightarrow{0,1}: c({x,y}=1iff (x<_{aleph_1}yiff i(x)<_mathbb{R}i(y)))$$ (with the two different orderings "decorated" for clarity). - it's not hard to show, using the separability (= countable dense subset) of $mathbb{R}$, that $c$ cannot have an uncountable homogeneous set.


          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies Konig's lemma: any infinite-height, finitely-branching tree has an infinite path. The "$kappa$-version" of this property, for an arbitrary infinite cardinal $kappa$, should be: "Any $<kappa$-branching tree of height $kappa$ has a $kappa$-length branch," but this too breaks down in general for uncountable sets, and in particular is again provably false for $aleph_1$.



          Combinatorial properties of $mathbb{N}$ in general are very special, and often correspond to large cardinal properties when lifted to the uncountable setting. For example, it is consistent with ZFC that only $aleph_0$ has the Ramsey property above.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Another special property of $aleph_0$ is that of being inaccessible in the sense that it cannot be obtained from smaller cardinals by the usual operations of cardinal arithmetic. The existence of inaccessible cardinals larger than $aleph_0$ cannot be proved in ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent).
            $endgroup$
            – mlerma54
            Dec 3 '18 at 20:09














          6












          6








          6





          $begingroup$

          There are a lot of combinatorial properties you lose. For example:




          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies infinite Ramsey's theorem for pairs: if $c:[mathbb{N}]^2rightarrow {0,1}$ is a $2$-coloring of pairs of natural numbers, then there is a $c$-homogeneous set $H$ (that is, $c({x,y})=c({x',y'})$ for all $xnot=y, x'not=y'$ in $H$) of the same size as $mathbb{N}$. This fails in general for uncountable sets: if $X$ is uncountable, there may be a $2$-coloring of pairs of elements of $X$ with no size-$X$ homogeneous set. In fact, this fails for most uncountable cardinalities in a precise sense (see below), and provably fails of $aleph_1$ (and indeed any uncountable $kappale 2^{aleph_0}$) in particular: fix an injection $i:aleph_1rightarrowmathbb{R}$, and consider the coloring $$c:[aleph_1]^2rightarrow{0,1}: c({x,y}=1iff (x<_{aleph_1}yiff i(x)<_mathbb{R}i(y)))$$ (with the two different orderings "decorated" for clarity). - it's not hard to show, using the separability (= countable dense subset) of $mathbb{R}$, that $c$ cannot have an uncountable homogeneous set.


          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies Konig's lemma: any infinite-height, finitely-branching tree has an infinite path. The "$kappa$-version" of this property, for an arbitrary infinite cardinal $kappa$, should be: "Any $<kappa$-branching tree of height $kappa$ has a $kappa$-length branch," but this too breaks down in general for uncountable sets, and in particular is again provably false for $aleph_1$.



          Combinatorial properties of $mathbb{N}$ in general are very special, and often correspond to large cardinal properties when lifted to the uncountable setting. For example, it is consistent with ZFC that only $aleph_0$ has the Ramsey property above.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          There are a lot of combinatorial properties you lose. For example:




          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies infinite Ramsey's theorem for pairs: if $c:[mathbb{N}]^2rightarrow {0,1}$ is a $2$-coloring of pairs of natural numbers, then there is a $c$-homogeneous set $H$ (that is, $c({x,y})=c({x',y'})$ for all $xnot=y, x'not=y'$ in $H$) of the same size as $mathbb{N}$. This fails in general for uncountable sets: if $X$ is uncountable, there may be a $2$-coloring of pairs of elements of $X$ with no size-$X$ homogeneous set. In fact, this fails for most uncountable cardinalities in a precise sense (see below), and provably fails of $aleph_1$ (and indeed any uncountable $kappale 2^{aleph_0}$) in particular: fix an injection $i:aleph_1rightarrowmathbb{R}$, and consider the coloring $$c:[aleph_1]^2rightarrow{0,1}: c({x,y}=1iff (x<_{aleph_1}yiff i(x)<_mathbb{R}i(y)))$$ (with the two different orderings "decorated" for clarity). - it's not hard to show, using the separability (= countable dense subset) of $mathbb{R}$, that $c$ cannot have an uncountable homogeneous set.


          • $mathbb{N}$ satisfies Konig's lemma: any infinite-height, finitely-branching tree has an infinite path. The "$kappa$-version" of this property, for an arbitrary infinite cardinal $kappa$, should be: "Any $<kappa$-branching tree of height $kappa$ has a $kappa$-length branch," but this too breaks down in general for uncountable sets, and in particular is again provably false for $aleph_1$.



          Combinatorial properties of $mathbb{N}$ in general are very special, and often correspond to large cardinal properties when lifted to the uncountable setting. For example, it is consistent with ZFC that only $aleph_0$ has the Ramsey property above.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 3 '18 at 19:58









          Noah SchweberNoah Schweber

          123k10150286




          123k10150286








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Another special property of $aleph_0$ is that of being inaccessible in the sense that it cannot be obtained from smaller cardinals by the usual operations of cardinal arithmetic. The existence of inaccessible cardinals larger than $aleph_0$ cannot be proved in ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent).
            $endgroup$
            – mlerma54
            Dec 3 '18 at 20:09














          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Another special property of $aleph_0$ is that of being inaccessible in the sense that it cannot be obtained from smaller cardinals by the usual operations of cardinal arithmetic. The existence of inaccessible cardinals larger than $aleph_0$ cannot be proved in ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent).
            $endgroup$
            – mlerma54
            Dec 3 '18 at 20:09








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Another special property of $aleph_0$ is that of being inaccessible in the sense that it cannot be obtained from smaller cardinals by the usual operations of cardinal arithmetic. The existence of inaccessible cardinals larger than $aleph_0$ cannot be proved in ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent).
          $endgroup$
          – mlerma54
          Dec 3 '18 at 20:09




          $begingroup$
          Another special property of $aleph_0$ is that of being inaccessible in the sense that it cannot be obtained from smaller cardinals by the usual operations of cardinal arithmetic. The existence of inaccessible cardinals larger than $aleph_0$ cannot be proved in ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent).
          $endgroup$
          – mlerma54
          Dec 3 '18 at 20:09


















          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.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3024543%2fwhat-are-the-properties-of-countably-infinite-sets-compared-to-sets-of-higher-ca%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

          Image
          Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l...
          Read more

          Puebla de Zaragoza

          Image
          Para otros usos de este término, véase Puebla (desambiguación). Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localidad De arriba a abajo de izquierda a derecha: Estrella de Puebla, Volcán Popocatépetl, Catedral de Puebla, Monumento a Ignacio Zaragoza, Estadio Cuauhtémoc, Angelópolis y Vista panorámica de la ciudad. Escudo Otros nombres: El relicario de América/ La ciudad de los Ángeles/ La Angelópolis Lema: Muy noble y muy leal ciudad de Puebla de los Ángeles Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en México Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en Puebla Mapa interactivo Coordenadas 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Coordenadas: 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Idioma oficial Español Entidad Localidad  • País   México  • Estado Puebla  • Municipio Puebla Presidente municipal Claudia Rivera Vivanc...
          Read more

          Musa

          Image
          Para el género de plantas, véase Musa (planta). Apolo y la Nueve Musas En la mitología griega, las musas (en griego antiguo μοῦσαι « mousai» ) son, según los escritores más antiguos, las divinidades inspiradoras de las Artes: cada una de ellas está relacionada con ramas artísticas y del conocimiento. Son hijas de Zeus y de Mnemósine, compañeras del séquito de Apolo, dios olímpico de la música y patrón de las bellas artes, quien tuvo romances con cada una de ellas, dejando descendientes. Bajaban a la tierra a susurrar ideas e inspirar a aquellos mortales que las invocaran. En la época más arcaica eran las ninfas inspiradoras de las fuentes, en las cuales eran adoradas. Finalmente, alrededor de los siglos VIII-VII a. C. [ 1 ] ​ prevaleció en todo el territorio de la Hélade la adoración de las nueve Musas, que son Calíope, Clío, Erato, Euterpe, Melpómene, Polimnia, Talía, Terpsícore y Urania. El culto a las musas era originalmente de Tracia y Beocia, y fueron de vital impo...
          Read more