Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Proving $|{\bf R}^{\bf R}|=|2^{\bf R}|$ using the Schroeder-Bernstein Theorem

+2
−0

Let $A$ be the set of all functions from ${\bf R}$ to ${\bf R}$ and $B$ the power set of ${\bf R}$. Then $|A|=|B|$.

This is a well-known result in set theory. A quick search on Google returns answers in various places explicitly using cardinal arithmetic.

Question: Can one prove the above result using the Schroeder-Bernstein Theorem?


Remark.

To use Schroeder-Bersnstein, one needs two injections. One easy direction is from $B$ to $A$: any subset of ${\bf R}$ can be identified as a function $f:{\bf R}\to\{0,1\}$. Such identification gives an injection from $B$ to $A$.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

2 answers

+2
−0

By definition $\mathbb R^\mathbb R \subset \mathbf 2^{\mathbb R\times\mathbb R}$. So all we need is a surjection $\mathbb R \twoheadrightarrow \mathbb R \times \mathbb R$ of which there are plenty such as space filling curves. If you have a bijection between $\mathbf 2^\mathbb N$ and $\mathbb R$, then a lot of this stuff is easier to do in terms of $\mathbf 2^\mathbb N$. For example, $\mathbf 2^\mathbb N \times \mathbf 2^\mathbb N \cong \mathbf 2^{\mathbb N + \mathbb N} \cong \mathbf 2^\mathbb N$ with the last bijection via the straightforward one showing $\mathbb N \cong \mathbb N + \mathbb N$ (where $+$ represents the disjoint union/coproduct).

That said, you should be able to fairly directly extract a bijection from a proof using cardinal arithmetic. Of course, there's no real reason to apply Schröder-Bernstein at that point.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

+1
−0

To apply the Schröder-Bernstein theorem, we need injections in two directions. Given that the Schröder-Bernstein theorem doesn't require the axiom of choice (AC), there's a value in avoiding anything that requires AC (such as the theorem that existence of a surjection from $A$ to $B$ implies the existence of an injection from $B$ to $A$).

I'll construct the two injections explicitly; that way I can be sure to not accidentally use the AC. Note I'll use $\mathcal P(\mathbb R)$ to denote the power set of $\mathbb R$.

An injection $\mathcal P(\mathbb R)\to\mathbb R^{\mathbb R}$ can be given as $$f(A) = x\mapsto\begin{cases} 1 & x\in A\\ 0 & x\notin A \end{cases}$$

For an injection $\mathbb R^{\mathbb R}\to \mathcal P(\mathbb R)$, we start with a bijection $\phi:\mathbb R\to (0,1)$ given by $$\phi(x) = \exp(-\exp (x))$$

Then we define an injection $\iota:(0,1)\to \mathcal P(\mathbb N)$ by writing the number as dyadic fraction (choosing the period-0 representation in case of ambiguity), and then defining $$\iota(x) = \{n\in\mathbb N: \text{the $n$-th digit is 1}\}$$

With those two ingredients, we now can build an injection $\alpha: \mathbb R^{\mathbb R}\to\mathcal P(\mathbb N\times\mathbb R)$ given by $$\alpha(f) = \{(n,x)\in\mathbb N\times\mathbb R: n\in\iota\circ\phi\circ f\}$$

Next, we define the surjection $\sigma:\mathbb R\to\mathbb N\times\mathbb R$ by $$\sigma(x) = \begin{cases} \Big(\Big|\lfloor x\rfloor\Big|,0\Big) & x\in\mathbb Z\\ \Big(\Big|\lfloor x\rfloor\Big|,\ln(-\ln(x-\lfloor x\rfloor))\Big) & \text{otherwise} \end{cases}$$ Finally we define the function $g:\mathbb R^{\mathbb R}\to \mathcal P(\mathbb R)$ as $$g(f) =\{x\in \mathbb R:\sigma(x)\in\alpha(f)\}$$

What remains is to prove that $g$ is indeed an injection. For this, assume $g(f_1) = g(f_2)$. Since $\sigma$ is surjective, this implies $\alpha(f_1) = \alpha(f_2)$, as otherwise there would be some $x$ such that $\sigma(x)$ is in exactly one of $\alpha(f_1)$ and $\alpha(f_2)$. But $\alpha$ in injective by construction, thus $f_1=f_2$.

Since we thus have, by explicit construction, both an injection $\mathcal P(\mathbb R)\to\mathbb R^{\mathbb R}$ and an injection $\mathbb R^{\mathbb R}\to \mathcal P(\mathbb R)$, we now can use Schröder-Bernstein to conclude that there exists a bijection between those sets.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »