Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- From: Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:51:00 GMT
On 2007-12-23, in sci.math, mike3 wrote:
But this doesn't seem to work. Wouldn't this imply the continuum
hypothesis is false, as then beth_1, the cardinal number of the
continuum, could not equal aleph_1, since it's not an aleph!
But that is independent of the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms!
Right, and so is the negation of choice. In absence of choice the two usual
formulations of the continuum hypothesis:
"The cardinality of the continuum is aleph-1."
"Every infinite set of reals is either countable or of the cardinality of
the continuum."
are not equivalent. Even on the assumption that the beth-1 is not an aleph
-- which, incidentally, is not implied by failure of choice -- the second
formulation remains independent.
This would suggest at best we could say that whether or not beth_1 is
an aleph in ZF (note: no AC) is undecidable.
Right.
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
.
- References:
- Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- From: mike3
- Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- From: Dave Seaman
- Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- From: mike3
- Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- From: Butch Malahide
- Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- From: mike3
- Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- Prev by Date: Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- Next by Date: Re: Partial recursive functions and minimization
- Previous by thread: Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- Next by thread: Re: Non-aleph cardinals in set theory without axiom of choice?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|