Homepage › Solution manuals › Stephen Abbott › Understanding Analysis › Exercise 1.6.10
Exercise 1.6.10
As a final exercise, answer each of the following by establishing a correspondence with a set of known cardinality.
- (a)
- Is the set of all functions from to countable or uncountable?
- (b)
- Is the set of all functions from to countable or uncountable?
- (c)
- Given a set , a subset of is called an antichain if no element of is a subset of any other element of Does contain an uncountable antichain?
Answers
- (a)
- The set of functions from to is the same as which we found was countable in Exercise 1.5.9.
- (b)
- This is the same as an infinite list of zeros and ones which we showed was uncountable in Exercise 1.6.4.
- (c)
-
Let
be an antichain of
, let
be the sets in
of size
. For finite
,
is countable since
is countable (shown in 1.5.9). Therefore the countable union
is countable. Thus, if
contains an uncountable antichain, “most" sets in the antichain must be infinite (in that there will be uncountably many sets in the antichain will be infinite, whereas only countably many sets in the antichain will be finite).
This observation inspires the following construction, using a variant of the set from Exercise 1.6.4. Define the set
where is the ’th digit in the decimal expansion of . To avoid the issue of some numbers having two equivalent decimal representations, always use the representation with repeating 9’s. In this manner, each element of encodes a particular real number, in a similar way that each element of encodes a particular real number through its binary expansion.
Note that each element of is infinite. Note also that since any two distinct real numbers will differ in at least one place in their decimal expansions, the corresponding elements in will differ there as well, and hence is an antichain.
Formally, let be two distinct real numbers, be the elements of corresponding to respectively, and be the first decimal position where and differ. Then will be in but not , and will be in but not . Thus, neither nor . Since is uncountable, is an uncountable antichain in .
Comments
(O.K. with the proof of Ulisse Mini. I propose another approach.)
Proof. c) Consider first
Then (Theorem 1.5.8(i)). We will prove that contains an uncountable antichain .
Let
where .
If , then, for some ,
Suppose that . For all , or .
If , then for some natural number , thus , so . This shows that , and similarly , hence
Therefore , so , thus . This proves for all . No element of is a subset of any other element of , so that is an antichain.
Moreover
is bijective:
- surjective by definition of .
- injective, since
Therefore is uncountable.
To finish the proof, knowing that , there is some bijective. Then is an uncountable antichain of : if , then for some , and
(so .) □