Can an uncountable group have a countable number of subgroups? [closed]












15












$begingroup$



Can an uncountable group have only a countable number of subgroups?



Please give examples if any exist!




Edit: I want a group having uncountable cardinality but having a countable number of subgroups.



By countable number of subgroups, I mean the collection of all subgroups of a group is countable.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



closed as off-topic by Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire Dec 9 '18 at 19:28


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.












  • 5




    $begingroup$
    I'm frankly a bit surprised at the negative reaction to this question.
    $endgroup$
    – Noah Schweber
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:00






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of Countable number of subgroups $implies $ countable group
    $endgroup$
    – Carmeister
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:05










  • $begingroup$
    Then why is it marked as "off-topic" rather than "duplicate"?
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:42










  • $begingroup$
    I'm voting to reopen. If it should be closed please give the correct reason.
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:44










  • $begingroup$
    @CMonsour It was closed because there is no context. It's just a problem statement with no details. The closure reason is correct. While it might be better that it be listed as a duplicate, I don't see that as a reason to reopen.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 9 '18 at 21:10
















15












$begingroup$



Can an uncountable group have only a countable number of subgroups?



Please give examples if any exist!




Edit: I want a group having uncountable cardinality but having a countable number of subgroups.



By countable number of subgroups, I mean the collection of all subgroups of a group is countable.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$



closed as off-topic by Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire Dec 9 '18 at 19:28


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.












  • 5




    $begingroup$
    I'm frankly a bit surprised at the negative reaction to this question.
    $endgroup$
    – Noah Schweber
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:00






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of Countable number of subgroups $implies $ countable group
    $endgroup$
    – Carmeister
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:05










  • $begingroup$
    Then why is it marked as "off-topic" rather than "duplicate"?
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:42










  • $begingroup$
    I'm voting to reopen. If it should be closed please give the correct reason.
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:44










  • $begingroup$
    @CMonsour It was closed because there is no context. It's just a problem statement with no details. The closure reason is correct. While it might be better that it be listed as a duplicate, I don't see that as a reason to reopen.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 9 '18 at 21:10














15












15








15


3



$begingroup$



Can an uncountable group have only a countable number of subgroups?



Please give examples if any exist!




Edit: I want a group having uncountable cardinality but having a countable number of subgroups.



By countable number of subgroups, I mean the collection of all subgroups of a group is countable.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$





Can an uncountable group have only a countable number of subgroups?



Please give examples if any exist!




Edit: I want a group having uncountable cardinality but having a countable number of subgroups.



By countable number of subgroups, I mean the collection of all subgroups of a group is countable.







group-theory examples-counterexamples infinite-groups






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 9 '18 at 3:01









Shaun

8,941113681




8,941113681










asked Dec 9 '18 at 2:47









Cloud JRCloud JR

878517




878517




closed as off-topic by Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire Dec 9 '18 at 19:28


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.







closed as off-topic by Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire Dec 9 '18 at 19:28


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please provide additional context, which ideally explains why the question is relevant to you and our community. Some forms of context include: background and motivation, relevant definitions, source, possible strategies, your current progress, why the question is interesting or important, etc." – Shaun, Brian Borchers, user10354138, Cesareo, TheSimpliFire

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.








  • 5




    $begingroup$
    I'm frankly a bit surprised at the negative reaction to this question.
    $endgroup$
    – Noah Schweber
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:00






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of Countable number of subgroups $implies $ countable group
    $endgroup$
    – Carmeister
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:05










  • $begingroup$
    Then why is it marked as "off-topic" rather than "duplicate"?
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:42










  • $begingroup$
    I'm voting to reopen. If it should be closed please give the correct reason.
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:44










  • $begingroup$
    @CMonsour It was closed because there is no context. It's just a problem statement with no details. The closure reason is correct. While it might be better that it be listed as a duplicate, I don't see that as a reason to reopen.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 9 '18 at 21:10














  • 5




    $begingroup$
    I'm frankly a bit surprised at the negative reaction to this question.
    $endgroup$
    – Noah Schweber
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:00






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of Countable number of subgroups $implies $ countable group
    $endgroup$
    – Carmeister
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:05










  • $begingroup$
    Then why is it marked as "off-topic" rather than "duplicate"?
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:42










  • $begingroup$
    I'm voting to reopen. If it should be closed please give the correct reason.
    $endgroup$
    – C Monsour
    Dec 9 '18 at 20:44










  • $begingroup$
    @CMonsour It was closed because there is no context. It's just a problem statement with no details. The closure reason is correct. While it might be better that it be listed as a duplicate, I don't see that as a reason to reopen.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 9 '18 at 21:10








5




5




$begingroup$
I'm frankly a bit surprised at the negative reaction to this question.
$endgroup$
– Noah Schweber
Dec 9 '18 at 3:00




$begingroup$
I'm frankly a bit surprised at the negative reaction to this question.
$endgroup$
– Noah Schweber
Dec 9 '18 at 3:00




2




2




$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of Countable number of subgroups $implies $ countable group
$endgroup$
– Carmeister
Dec 9 '18 at 10:05




$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of Countable number of subgroups $implies $ countable group
$endgroup$
– Carmeister
Dec 9 '18 at 10:05












$begingroup$
Then why is it marked as "off-topic" rather than "duplicate"?
$endgroup$
– C Monsour
Dec 9 '18 at 20:42




$begingroup$
Then why is it marked as "off-topic" rather than "duplicate"?
$endgroup$
– C Monsour
Dec 9 '18 at 20:42












$begingroup$
I'm voting to reopen. If it should be closed please give the correct reason.
$endgroup$
– C Monsour
Dec 9 '18 at 20:44




$begingroup$
I'm voting to reopen. If it should be closed please give the correct reason.
$endgroup$
– C Monsour
Dec 9 '18 at 20:44












$begingroup$
@CMonsour It was closed because there is no context. It's just a problem statement with no details. The closure reason is correct. While it might be better that it be listed as a duplicate, I don't see that as a reason to reopen.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 9 '18 at 21:10




$begingroup$
@CMonsour It was closed because there is no context. It's just a problem statement with no details. The closure reason is correct. While it might be better that it be listed as a duplicate, I don't see that as a reason to reopen.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 9 '18 at 21:10










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















27












$begingroup$

No. Suppose $G$ is an uncountable group. Every element $g$ of $G$ belongs to a countable subgroup of $G$, namely the cyclic subgroup $langle grangle$. Thus $G$ is the union of all of its countable subgroups. Since a countable union of countable sets is countable, $G$ must have uncountably many countable subgroups.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can we be sure that the subgroups generated by $g$ and $g'$ (for $gnot= g'$) are not the same?
    $endgroup$
    – BenjaminH
    Dec 9 '18 at 8:54












  • $begingroup$
    With a bit of refinement, this argument can be turned into the group being a countable union of finite sets. I forgot if this makes it countable without choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Dec 9 '18 at 9:00










  • $begingroup$
    @TobiasKildetoft The axiom of choice is needed to prove that a countable union of two-element sets is countable. (If the union were countable, you could prove the axiom of choice for two-element sets.)
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:17






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    @BenjaminH : You can't, for a specific pair $g,g'$. However, both $langle grangle$ and $langle g'rangle$ are countable, so there are indeed uncountably many such subgroups (otherwise a countable union of countable sets would exhaust $G$, which is not possible).
    $endgroup$
    – MPW
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:23



















9












$begingroup$

EDIT: bof's answer is the right one, but the construction below - while completely pointless overkill - is still an example of a useful technique, so I'm leaving this answer up.





No, this cannot happen.



Suppose $G$ is a group and $A$ is a countable subset of $G$. Then the closure of $A$ under the group operations ($*$ and $^{-1}$) of $G$, $langle Arangle$, is again countable - this is a good exercise (HINT: the set of finite strings from a countable set is countable).



With this in hand, if $G$ is an uncountable group we can build an uncountable chain of subgroups of $G$, as follows:




  • We will define a countable subgroup $A_delta$ for every countable ordinal $delta$. There are uncountably many of these, so if we can do this we'll be done.


  • We let $A_0$ be the trivial subgroup.


  • Having defined $A_eta$ for every $eta<delta$, we let $a$ be some element of $G$ not in $bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta$ - which exists, since this is a countable union of countable subgroups, and $G$ is uncountable - and let $A_delta=langle (bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta)cup{a}rangle$.


  • It's easy to prove by transfinite induction that $(A_delta)_{delta<omega_1}$ is a strictly increasing chain of countable subgroups of $G$, so we're done.







share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Both answers use the axiom of choice. In ZF, can there be an uncountable group with only a countable number of subgroups?
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:43






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @bof This question that I asked and Noah answered a while ago should answer your question
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Plummer
    Dec 9 '18 at 4:51


















2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









27












$begingroup$

No. Suppose $G$ is an uncountable group. Every element $g$ of $G$ belongs to a countable subgroup of $G$, namely the cyclic subgroup $langle grangle$. Thus $G$ is the union of all of its countable subgroups. Since a countable union of countable sets is countable, $G$ must have uncountably many countable subgroups.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can we be sure that the subgroups generated by $g$ and $g'$ (for $gnot= g'$) are not the same?
    $endgroup$
    – BenjaminH
    Dec 9 '18 at 8:54












  • $begingroup$
    With a bit of refinement, this argument can be turned into the group being a countable union of finite sets. I forgot if this makes it countable without choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Dec 9 '18 at 9:00










  • $begingroup$
    @TobiasKildetoft The axiom of choice is needed to prove that a countable union of two-element sets is countable. (If the union were countable, you could prove the axiom of choice for two-element sets.)
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:17






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    @BenjaminH : You can't, for a specific pair $g,g'$. However, both $langle grangle$ and $langle g'rangle$ are countable, so there are indeed uncountably many such subgroups (otherwise a countable union of countable sets would exhaust $G$, which is not possible).
    $endgroup$
    – MPW
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:23
















27












$begingroup$

No. Suppose $G$ is an uncountable group. Every element $g$ of $G$ belongs to a countable subgroup of $G$, namely the cyclic subgroup $langle grangle$. Thus $G$ is the union of all of its countable subgroups. Since a countable union of countable sets is countable, $G$ must have uncountably many countable subgroups.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can we be sure that the subgroups generated by $g$ and $g'$ (for $gnot= g'$) are not the same?
    $endgroup$
    – BenjaminH
    Dec 9 '18 at 8:54












  • $begingroup$
    With a bit of refinement, this argument can be turned into the group being a countable union of finite sets. I forgot if this makes it countable without choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Dec 9 '18 at 9:00










  • $begingroup$
    @TobiasKildetoft The axiom of choice is needed to prove that a countable union of two-element sets is countable. (If the union were countable, you could prove the axiom of choice for two-element sets.)
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:17






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    @BenjaminH : You can't, for a specific pair $g,g'$. However, both $langle grangle$ and $langle g'rangle$ are countable, so there are indeed uncountably many such subgroups (otherwise a countable union of countable sets would exhaust $G$, which is not possible).
    $endgroup$
    – MPW
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:23














27












27








27





$begingroup$

No. Suppose $G$ is an uncountable group. Every element $g$ of $G$ belongs to a countable subgroup of $G$, namely the cyclic subgroup $langle grangle$. Thus $G$ is the union of all of its countable subgroups. Since a countable union of countable sets is countable, $G$ must have uncountably many countable subgroups.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



No. Suppose $G$ is an uncountable group. Every element $g$ of $G$ belongs to a countable subgroup of $G$, namely the cyclic subgroup $langle grangle$. Thus $G$ is the union of all of its countable subgroups. Since a countable union of countable sets is countable, $G$ must have uncountably many countable subgroups.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 9 '18 at 2:56









bofbof

51.3k457120




51.3k457120








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can we be sure that the subgroups generated by $g$ and $g'$ (for $gnot= g'$) are not the same?
    $endgroup$
    – BenjaminH
    Dec 9 '18 at 8:54












  • $begingroup$
    With a bit of refinement, this argument can be turned into the group being a countable union of finite sets. I forgot if this makes it countable without choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Dec 9 '18 at 9:00










  • $begingroup$
    @TobiasKildetoft The axiom of choice is needed to prove that a countable union of two-element sets is countable. (If the union were countable, you could prove the axiom of choice for two-element sets.)
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:17






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    @BenjaminH : You can't, for a specific pair $g,g'$. However, both $langle grangle$ and $langle g'rangle$ are countable, so there are indeed uncountably many such subgroups (otherwise a countable union of countable sets would exhaust $G$, which is not possible).
    $endgroup$
    – MPW
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:23














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can we be sure that the subgroups generated by $g$ and $g'$ (for $gnot= g'$) are not the same?
    $endgroup$
    – BenjaminH
    Dec 9 '18 at 8:54












  • $begingroup$
    With a bit of refinement, this argument can be turned into the group being a countable union of finite sets. I forgot if this makes it countable without choice.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Dec 9 '18 at 9:00










  • $begingroup$
    @TobiasKildetoft The axiom of choice is needed to prove that a countable union of two-element sets is countable. (If the union were countable, you could prove the axiom of choice for two-element sets.)
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 10:17






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    @BenjaminH : You can't, for a specific pair $g,g'$. However, both $langle grangle$ and $langle g'rangle$ are countable, so there are indeed uncountably many such subgroups (otherwise a countable union of countable sets would exhaust $G$, which is not possible).
    $endgroup$
    – MPW
    Dec 9 '18 at 13:23








1




1




$begingroup$
How can we be sure that the subgroups generated by $g$ and $g'$ (for $gnot= g'$) are not the same?
$endgroup$
– BenjaminH
Dec 9 '18 at 8:54






$begingroup$
How can we be sure that the subgroups generated by $g$ and $g'$ (for $gnot= g'$) are not the same?
$endgroup$
– BenjaminH
Dec 9 '18 at 8:54














$begingroup$
With a bit of refinement, this argument can be turned into the group being a countable union of finite sets. I forgot if this makes it countable without choice.
$endgroup$
– Tobias Kildetoft
Dec 9 '18 at 9:00




$begingroup$
With a bit of refinement, this argument can be turned into the group being a countable union of finite sets. I forgot if this makes it countable without choice.
$endgroup$
– Tobias Kildetoft
Dec 9 '18 at 9:00












$begingroup$
@TobiasKildetoft The axiom of choice is needed to prove that a countable union of two-element sets is countable. (If the union were countable, you could prove the axiom of choice for two-element sets.)
$endgroup$
– bof
Dec 9 '18 at 10:17




$begingroup$
@TobiasKildetoft The axiom of choice is needed to prove that a countable union of two-element sets is countable. (If the union were countable, you could prove the axiom of choice for two-element sets.)
$endgroup$
– bof
Dec 9 '18 at 10:17




4




4




$begingroup$
@BenjaminH : You can't, for a specific pair $g,g'$. However, both $langle grangle$ and $langle g'rangle$ are countable, so there are indeed uncountably many such subgroups (otherwise a countable union of countable sets would exhaust $G$, which is not possible).
$endgroup$
– MPW
Dec 9 '18 at 13:23




$begingroup$
@BenjaminH : You can't, for a specific pair $g,g'$. However, both $langle grangle$ and $langle g'rangle$ are countable, so there are indeed uncountably many such subgroups (otherwise a countable union of countable sets would exhaust $G$, which is not possible).
$endgroup$
– MPW
Dec 9 '18 at 13:23











9












$begingroup$

EDIT: bof's answer is the right one, but the construction below - while completely pointless overkill - is still an example of a useful technique, so I'm leaving this answer up.





No, this cannot happen.



Suppose $G$ is a group and $A$ is a countable subset of $G$. Then the closure of $A$ under the group operations ($*$ and $^{-1}$) of $G$, $langle Arangle$, is again countable - this is a good exercise (HINT: the set of finite strings from a countable set is countable).



With this in hand, if $G$ is an uncountable group we can build an uncountable chain of subgroups of $G$, as follows:




  • We will define a countable subgroup $A_delta$ for every countable ordinal $delta$. There are uncountably many of these, so if we can do this we'll be done.


  • We let $A_0$ be the trivial subgroup.


  • Having defined $A_eta$ for every $eta<delta$, we let $a$ be some element of $G$ not in $bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta$ - which exists, since this is a countable union of countable subgroups, and $G$ is uncountable - and let $A_delta=langle (bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta)cup{a}rangle$.


  • It's easy to prove by transfinite induction that $(A_delta)_{delta<omega_1}$ is a strictly increasing chain of countable subgroups of $G$, so we're done.







share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Both answers use the axiom of choice. In ZF, can there be an uncountable group with only a countable number of subgroups?
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:43






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @bof This question that I asked and Noah answered a while ago should answer your question
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Plummer
    Dec 9 '18 at 4:51
















9












$begingroup$

EDIT: bof's answer is the right one, but the construction below - while completely pointless overkill - is still an example of a useful technique, so I'm leaving this answer up.





No, this cannot happen.



Suppose $G$ is a group and $A$ is a countable subset of $G$. Then the closure of $A$ under the group operations ($*$ and $^{-1}$) of $G$, $langle Arangle$, is again countable - this is a good exercise (HINT: the set of finite strings from a countable set is countable).



With this in hand, if $G$ is an uncountable group we can build an uncountable chain of subgroups of $G$, as follows:




  • We will define a countable subgroup $A_delta$ for every countable ordinal $delta$. There are uncountably many of these, so if we can do this we'll be done.


  • We let $A_0$ be the trivial subgroup.


  • Having defined $A_eta$ for every $eta<delta$, we let $a$ be some element of $G$ not in $bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta$ - which exists, since this is a countable union of countable subgroups, and $G$ is uncountable - and let $A_delta=langle (bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta)cup{a}rangle$.


  • It's easy to prove by transfinite induction that $(A_delta)_{delta<omega_1}$ is a strictly increasing chain of countable subgroups of $G$, so we're done.







share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Both answers use the axiom of choice. In ZF, can there be an uncountable group with only a countable number of subgroups?
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:43






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @bof This question that I asked and Noah answered a while ago should answer your question
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Plummer
    Dec 9 '18 at 4:51














9












9








9





$begingroup$

EDIT: bof's answer is the right one, but the construction below - while completely pointless overkill - is still an example of a useful technique, so I'm leaving this answer up.





No, this cannot happen.



Suppose $G$ is a group and $A$ is a countable subset of $G$. Then the closure of $A$ under the group operations ($*$ and $^{-1}$) of $G$, $langle Arangle$, is again countable - this is a good exercise (HINT: the set of finite strings from a countable set is countable).



With this in hand, if $G$ is an uncountable group we can build an uncountable chain of subgroups of $G$, as follows:




  • We will define a countable subgroup $A_delta$ for every countable ordinal $delta$. There are uncountably many of these, so if we can do this we'll be done.


  • We let $A_0$ be the trivial subgroup.


  • Having defined $A_eta$ for every $eta<delta$, we let $a$ be some element of $G$ not in $bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta$ - which exists, since this is a countable union of countable subgroups, and $G$ is uncountable - and let $A_delta=langle (bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta)cup{a}rangle$.


  • It's easy to prove by transfinite induction that $(A_delta)_{delta<omega_1}$ is a strictly increasing chain of countable subgroups of $G$, so we're done.







share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



EDIT: bof's answer is the right one, but the construction below - while completely pointless overkill - is still an example of a useful technique, so I'm leaving this answer up.





No, this cannot happen.



Suppose $G$ is a group and $A$ is a countable subset of $G$. Then the closure of $A$ under the group operations ($*$ and $^{-1}$) of $G$, $langle Arangle$, is again countable - this is a good exercise (HINT: the set of finite strings from a countable set is countable).



With this in hand, if $G$ is an uncountable group we can build an uncountable chain of subgroups of $G$, as follows:




  • We will define a countable subgroup $A_delta$ for every countable ordinal $delta$. There are uncountably many of these, so if we can do this we'll be done.


  • We let $A_0$ be the trivial subgroup.


  • Having defined $A_eta$ for every $eta<delta$, we let $a$ be some element of $G$ not in $bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta$ - which exists, since this is a countable union of countable subgroups, and $G$ is uncountable - and let $A_delta=langle (bigcup_{eta<delta}A_eta)cup{a}rangle$.


  • It's easy to prove by transfinite induction that $(A_delta)_{delta<omega_1}$ is a strictly increasing chain of countable subgroups of $G$, so we're done.








share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 9 '18 at 2:58









Noah SchweberNoah Schweber

123k10150285




123k10150285












  • $begingroup$
    Both answers use the axiom of choice. In ZF, can there be an uncountable group with only a countable number of subgroups?
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:43






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @bof This question that I asked and Noah answered a while ago should answer your question
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Plummer
    Dec 9 '18 at 4:51


















  • $begingroup$
    Both answers use the axiom of choice. In ZF, can there be an uncountable group with only a countable number of subgroups?
    $endgroup$
    – bof
    Dec 9 '18 at 3:43






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @bof This question that I asked and Noah answered a while ago should answer your question
    $endgroup$
    – Paul Plummer
    Dec 9 '18 at 4:51
















$begingroup$
Both answers use the axiom of choice. In ZF, can there be an uncountable group with only a countable number of subgroups?
$endgroup$
– bof
Dec 9 '18 at 3:43




$begingroup$
Both answers use the axiom of choice. In ZF, can there be an uncountable group with only a countable number of subgroups?
$endgroup$
– bof
Dec 9 '18 at 3:43




2




2




$begingroup$
@bof This question that I asked and Noah answered a while ago should answer your question
$endgroup$
– Paul Plummer
Dec 9 '18 at 4:51




$begingroup$
@bof This question that I asked and Noah answered a while ago should answer your question
$endgroup$
– Paul Plummer
Dec 9 '18 at 4:51



Popular posts from this blog

Tonle Sap (See)

I get strange results when I access the Sqlitedatabase with Unity C# via XAMPP

Guatemaltekische Davis-Cup-Mannschaft