Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Exercise 4.1 - Countable Sets #9

Open
abhinav-upadhyay opened this issue Aug 18, 2019 · 2 comments
Open

Exercise 4.1 - Countable Sets #9

abhinav-upadhyay opened this issue Aug 18, 2019 · 2 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested Sets Exercises for Chapter 4, Sets

Comments

@abhinav-upadhyay
Copy link

I just want to ensure if my reasoning w.r.t. the examples I thought of for countable sets is correct or not.

Example 1:
CodeCogsEqn

In this case we can write a surjection F: N -> A as follows:
CodeCogsEqn

Example 2:

A = {set of all positive even integers}
In this case we could write a surjection such as:
F = {(0, 0), (1, 0), (2, 2), (3, 2), (4, 4), (5, 4),...}

On the other hand if we define A as
CodeCogsEqn

Then it is not possible to define a surjection F: N -> A (although I am not sure how to prove this).
Therefore A is not countable.

I am wondering what is the implication if the function F: N -> A is bijective. Does that have any special meaning?

@j2kun
Copy link
Contributor

j2kun commented Aug 18, 2019

Your examples 1,2 look correct. I like how you defined F as a set with the implied pattern in Example 2. Another way to do it would be to describe it as "F(n) is the largest even number less than or equal to n", or as a piecewise "F(n) = n if n is even, and n-1 if n is odd." Once you are comfortable with the idea that a function can be written as a set of pairs, you are certainly not obligated to always write it that way.

You're right that it's hard to prove that your third example is not countable. The problem of determining if a set is not countable is famous problem described in Exercise 4.8, in which I ask you to find a source on the internet that explains it. A while back I wrote a blog post on this topic, in case you're interested to read further.

If the function is bijective, then you for one know that the set is not finite. Generally you say that the set has "cardinality equal to $\mathbb{N}$", and this specific number is given a name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number

@j2kun j2kun added Sets Exercises for Chapter 4, Sets question Further information is requested labels Aug 18, 2019
@abhinav-upadhyay
Copy link
Author

Thank you Jeremy for validating my answer - and also providing the feedback, it's very helpful :)

That blog post is intriguing - I need to spend some time to understand it. I cam across some answers on math.stackexchange.com and they mentioned diagnolization but I had no clue about it - now I know something about it :)

All of these answers, pointers, and feedback is really great - much appreciated. Thank you once again.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested Sets Exercises for Chapter 4, Sets
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants