Is the function sending each set to its corresponding Hartogs number injective?












0












$begingroup$


Let $V$ be the class of all sets, $text{Ord}$ be the class of all ordinals, $text{InOrd}$ be the class of all initial ordinals, and $f:V to text{Ord}$ be the function that sends each set to its corresponding Hartogs number.



As a result, $f(a)=a+1$ for all $a in Bbb N$ and thus $f restriction Bbb N$ is injective.



I find it difficult to imagine the Hartogs numbers of infinite sets.




My question: Are $f,frestriction text{Ord},frestriction text{InOrd}$ injective?




Thank you in advance for your help!






elementary-set-theory ordinals







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What is the reason for downvoting my question? Did I do anything wrong?
    $endgroup$
    – Le Anh Dung
    Dec 5 '18 at 7:35
















0












$begingroup$


Let $V$ be the class of all sets, $text{Ord}$ be the class of all ordinals, $text{InOrd}$ be the class of all initial ordinals, and $f:V to text{Ord}$ be the function that sends each set to its corresponding Hartogs number.



As a result, $f(a)=a+1$ for all $a in Bbb N$ and thus $f restriction Bbb N$ is injective.



I find it difficult to imagine the Hartogs numbers of infinite sets.




My question: Are $f,frestriction text{Ord},frestriction text{InOrd}$ injective?




Thank you in advance for your help!






elementary-set-theory ordinals







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What is the reason for downvoting my question? Did I do anything wrong?
    $endgroup$
    – Le Anh Dung
    Dec 5 '18 at 7:35














0












0








0





$begingroup$


Let $V$ be the class of all sets, $text{Ord}$ be the class of all ordinals, $text{InOrd}$ be the class of all initial ordinals, and $f:V to text{Ord}$ be the function that sends each set to its corresponding Hartogs number.



As a result, $f(a)=a+1$ for all $a in Bbb N$ and thus $f restriction Bbb N$ is injective.



I find it difficult to imagine the Hartogs numbers of infinite sets.




My question: Are $f,frestriction text{Ord},frestriction text{InOrd}$ injective?




Thank you in advance for your help!






elementary-set-theory ordinals







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Let $V$ be the class of all sets, $text{Ord}$ be the class of all ordinals, $text{InOrd}$ be the class of all initial ordinals, and $f:V to text{Ord}$ be the function that sends each set to its corresponding Hartogs number.



As a result, $f(a)=a+1$ for all $a in Bbb N$ and thus $f restriction Bbb N$ is injective.



I find it difficult to imagine the Hartogs numbers of infinite sets.




My question: Are $f,frestriction text{Ord},frestriction text{InOrd}$ injective?




Thank you in advance for your help!






elementary-set-theory ordinals




elementary-set-theory ordinals






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 5 '18 at 3:16







Le Anh Dung

















asked Dec 5 '18 at 3:09









Le Anh DungLe Anh Dung

1,0291521




1,0291521












  • $begingroup$
    What is the reason for downvoting my question? Did I do anything wrong?
    $endgroup$
    – Le Anh Dung
    Dec 5 '18 at 7:35


















  • $begingroup$
    What is the reason for downvoting my question? Did I do anything wrong?
    $endgroup$
    – Le Anh Dung
    Dec 5 '18 at 7:35
















$begingroup$
What is the reason for downvoting my question? Did I do anything wrong?
$endgroup$
– Le Anh Dung
Dec 5 '18 at 7:35




$begingroup$
What is the reason for downvoting my question? Did I do anything wrong?
$endgroup$
– Le Anh Dung
Dec 5 '18 at 7:35










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

The answers to $1$ and $2$ are no: for example, it's easy to show that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ (where $omega_1$ is the first uncountable ordinal). More generally, what can you say about $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ if there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$ (that is, if two sets have the same cardinality, how are their Hartogs numbers related)?



The connection with cardinality, in turn, suggests that the situation with respect to cardinals (= initial ordinals) might be different. And indeed it is:




  • Suppose $kappa<lambda$ are infinite cardinals and $f(kappa)=f(lambda)$.


  • We clearly have $lambda<f(lambda)$ (since there's a bijection between $lambda$ and $lambda+1$), so we get $lambda<f(kappa)$.


  • But then there must be a surjection from $kappa$ to $lambda$. So $f$ is injective on the initial ordinals.




Note that as long as we have the axiom of choice, the Hartogs number is only about cardinality: $f(x)=f(y)$ iff there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$. Without the axiom of choice, however, this breaks down in general.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Thank you so much for your detailed answer!
    $endgroup$
    – Le Anh Dung
    Dec 5 '18 at 16:25



















0












$begingroup$

Note that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ and $omeganeqomega+1$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3026552%2fis-the-function-sending-each-set-to-its-corresponding-hartogs-number-injective%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    The answers to $1$ and $2$ are no: for example, it's easy to show that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ (where $omega_1$ is the first uncountable ordinal). More generally, what can you say about $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ if there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$ (that is, if two sets have the same cardinality, how are their Hartogs numbers related)?



    The connection with cardinality, in turn, suggests that the situation with respect to cardinals (= initial ordinals) might be different. And indeed it is:




    • Suppose $kappa<lambda$ are infinite cardinals and $f(kappa)=f(lambda)$.


    • We clearly have $lambda<f(lambda)$ (since there's a bijection between $lambda$ and $lambda+1$), so we get $lambda<f(kappa)$.


    • But then there must be a surjection from $kappa$ to $lambda$. So $f$ is injective on the initial ordinals.




    Note that as long as we have the axiom of choice, the Hartogs number is only about cardinality: $f(x)=f(y)$ iff there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$. Without the axiom of choice, however, this breaks down in general.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Thank you so much for your detailed answer!
      $endgroup$
      – Le Anh Dung
      Dec 5 '18 at 16:25
















    2












    $begingroup$

    The answers to $1$ and $2$ are no: for example, it's easy to show that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ (where $omega_1$ is the first uncountable ordinal). More generally, what can you say about $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ if there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$ (that is, if two sets have the same cardinality, how are their Hartogs numbers related)?



    The connection with cardinality, in turn, suggests that the situation with respect to cardinals (= initial ordinals) might be different. And indeed it is:




    • Suppose $kappa<lambda$ are infinite cardinals and $f(kappa)=f(lambda)$.


    • We clearly have $lambda<f(lambda)$ (since there's a bijection between $lambda$ and $lambda+1$), so we get $lambda<f(kappa)$.


    • But then there must be a surjection from $kappa$ to $lambda$. So $f$ is injective on the initial ordinals.




    Note that as long as we have the axiom of choice, the Hartogs number is only about cardinality: $f(x)=f(y)$ iff there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$. Without the axiom of choice, however, this breaks down in general.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Thank you so much for your detailed answer!
      $endgroup$
      – Le Anh Dung
      Dec 5 '18 at 16:25














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    The answers to $1$ and $2$ are no: for example, it's easy to show that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ (where $omega_1$ is the first uncountable ordinal). More generally, what can you say about $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ if there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$ (that is, if two sets have the same cardinality, how are their Hartogs numbers related)?



    The connection with cardinality, in turn, suggests that the situation with respect to cardinals (= initial ordinals) might be different. And indeed it is:




    • Suppose $kappa<lambda$ are infinite cardinals and $f(kappa)=f(lambda)$.


    • We clearly have $lambda<f(lambda)$ (since there's a bijection between $lambda$ and $lambda+1$), so we get $lambda<f(kappa)$.


    • But then there must be a surjection from $kappa$ to $lambda$. So $f$ is injective on the initial ordinals.




    Note that as long as we have the axiom of choice, the Hartogs number is only about cardinality: $f(x)=f(y)$ iff there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$. Without the axiom of choice, however, this breaks down in general.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    The answers to $1$ and $2$ are no: for example, it's easy to show that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ (where $omega_1$ is the first uncountable ordinal). More generally, what can you say about $f(x)$ and $f(y)$ if there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$ (that is, if two sets have the same cardinality, how are their Hartogs numbers related)?



    The connection with cardinality, in turn, suggests that the situation with respect to cardinals (= initial ordinals) might be different. And indeed it is:




    • Suppose $kappa<lambda$ are infinite cardinals and $f(kappa)=f(lambda)$.


    • We clearly have $lambda<f(lambda)$ (since there's a bijection between $lambda$ and $lambda+1$), so we get $lambda<f(kappa)$.


    • But then there must be a surjection from $kappa$ to $lambda$. So $f$ is injective on the initial ordinals.




    Note that as long as we have the axiom of choice, the Hartogs number is only about cardinality: $f(x)=f(y)$ iff there is a bijection between $x$ and $y$. Without the axiom of choice, however, this breaks down in general.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Dec 5 '18 at 3:24









    Noah SchweberNoah Schweber

    123k10150285




    123k10150285












    • $begingroup$
      Thank you so much for your detailed answer!
      $endgroup$
      – Le Anh Dung
      Dec 5 '18 at 16:25


















    • $begingroup$
      Thank you so much for your detailed answer!
      $endgroup$
      – Le Anh Dung
      Dec 5 '18 at 16:25
















    $begingroup$
    Thank you so much for your detailed answer!
    $endgroup$
    – Le Anh Dung
    Dec 5 '18 at 16:25




    $begingroup$
    Thank you so much for your detailed answer!
    $endgroup$
    – Le Anh Dung
    Dec 5 '18 at 16:25











    0












    $begingroup$

    Note that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ and $omeganeqomega+1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      Note that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ and $omeganeqomega+1$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        Note that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ and $omeganeqomega+1$.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Note that $f(omega)=f(omega+1)=omega_1$ and $omeganeqomega+1$.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 5 '18 at 3:25









        GödelGödel

        1,416319




        1,416319






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3026552%2fis-the-function-sending-each-set-to-its-corresponding-hartogs-number-injective%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            Quarter-circle Tiles

            Image
            up vote 0 down vote favorite I have $99$ identical square tiles, each with a quarter-circle drawn on it like this: [asy] size(1.5cm); draw(Arc((2,0),1,90,180),red+1); draw((0,0)--(2,0)--(2,2)--(0,2)--(0,0)); [/asy] When I arrange the tiles in a $9times 11$ rectangular grid, each with a random orientation, what is the expected value of the number of full circles I form? I think this problem has to do with finding the chance any given 2x2 square has a circle, but I can't find it. expected-value share | cite | improve this question asked Nov 20 at 15:03 6minecraftninja 1 2
            Read more

            build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

            Image
            0 I think it's similiar to NFAs. I replace the finite states of the given automaton for start-states for my new automaton. I do it with $epsilon$ -transition from the start state to the actual finite states of the given automaton. The start state of the given automaton will be my accepting(finite) state of my new one. All transitions will be reversed of course to recognize the reversed word. But how do I have to change the stack of the pushdown automaton? That's tricky. formal-languages automata context-free-grammar share | cite | improve this question edited Nov 29 '18 at 14:20 joee
            Read more

            Mont Emei

            Image
            Mont Emei.mw-parser-output .entete.map{background-image:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Picto_infobox_map.png")} Vue du sommet Wanfo du mont Emei Géographie Altitude 3 099  m , Wanfo Coordonnées 29° 31′ 11″ nord, 103° 19′ 57″ est Administration Pays   Chine Province Sichuan Ville-préfecture Leshan Géolocalisation sur la carte : Sichuan Mont Emei Géolocalisation sur la carte : Chine Mont Emei modifier   Paysage panoramique du mont Emei, incluant le paysage panoramique du grand Bouddha de Leshan *   Patrimoine mondial de l'UNESCO Passerelle en bois sur le versant ouest Pays   Chine Subdivision Sichuan Type Mixte Critères (iv) (vi) (x) Superficie 15 400 ha Numéro d’identification 779 Zone géographique Asie et Pacifique  ** Année d’inscription 1996 (20 e session) * Descriptif officiel UNESCO ** Classification géog
            Read more