Proof that $sigma$-algebra is not countable (proof revision)
$begingroup$
This problem has already several answers here
Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable
and it has been asked a lot times before.
But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
This is the problem:
Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that
(a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets
(b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable
So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
$$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.
For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.
Thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This problem has already several answers here
Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable
and it has been asked a lot times before.
But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
This is the problem:
Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that
(a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets
(b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable
So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
$$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.
For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.
Thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This problem has already several answers here
Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable
and it has been asked a lot times before.
But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
This is the problem:
Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that
(a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets
(b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable
So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
$$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.
For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.
Thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
$endgroup$
This problem has already several answers here
Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable
and it has been asked a lot times before.
But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
This is the problem:
Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that
(a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets
(b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable
So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
$$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.
For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.
Thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification
edited Dec 18 '18 at 7:37
Did
248k23224463
248k23224463
asked Dec 18 '18 at 6:37
mate89mate89
1799
1799
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.
The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 4:23
$begingroup$
@mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:11
$begingroup$
Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 5:22
$begingroup$
@mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3044851%2fproof-that-sigma-algebra-is-not-countable-proof-revision%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
$begingroup$
There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.
The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 4:23
$begingroup$
@mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:11
$begingroup$
Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 5:22
$begingroup$
@mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.
The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 4:23
$begingroup$
@mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:11
$begingroup$
Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 5:22
$begingroup$
@mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.
The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.
$endgroup$
There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.
The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 7:04
Henno BrandsmaHenno Brandsma
110k347117
110k347117
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 4:23
$begingroup$
@mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:11
$begingroup$
Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 5:22
$begingroup$
@mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 4:23
$begingroup$
@mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:11
$begingroup$
Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 5:22
$begingroup$
@mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 4:23
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 4:23
$begingroup$
@mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:11
$begingroup$
@mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:11
$begingroup$
Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 5:22
$begingroup$
Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
$endgroup$
– mate89
Dec 19 '18 at 5:22
$begingroup$
@mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
$begingroup$
@mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
$endgroup$
– Henno Brandsma
Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3044851%2fproof-that-sigma-algebra-is-not-countable-proof-revision%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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