How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced — the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted — a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated — a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Construction of the Natural Numbers
1 · Prerequisites
2 · Summary
Objective. This page builds the natural numbers from the ground and proves the facts that every later construction silently assumes. It is the prerequisite that sits beneath the two constructions of , the Cauchy-sequence construction and the Dedekind-cut construction: both begin "the natural numbers, with their arithmetic and order, are the assumed starting point", and this page discharges exactly that assumption. The headline is the principle of mathematical induction (The principle of mathematical induction), the proof technique used everywhere in mathematics, obtained here from its set-theoretic source.
Two starting points, reconciled. There are two standard ways to say what the natural numbers are, and we use both. The Peano axioms (Peano system) describe abstractly as a triple with a zero, a successor, and an induction axiom. ZFC set theory instead builds a concrete model: the Axiom of Infinity yields an inductive set (Inductive set), and the smallest one (The natural numbers exist: a smallest inductive set) is the set of von Neumann naturals (The natural numbers (von Neumann)), where and , so each number is the set of its predecessors. The bridge between the two views is The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system: the von Neumann model satisfies the Peano axioms, so a Peano system provably exists. Everything after the bridge is proved from the Peano axioms alone, so it holds in any model.
Induction, and definition by recursion. Minimality of is exactly the induction principle: a set of naturals that contains and is closed under the successor is everything (The principle of mathematical induction). Its indispensable companion is the recursion theorem (The recursion theorem), which licenses defining a function on by specifying its value at and at each successor. Without it the recursive definitions of addition and multiplication would be unjustified; with it they are genuine total functions (Addition is a well-defined total operation, Multiplication is a well-defined total operation).
Arithmetic, proved. Addition (Addition of natural numbers) and multiplication (Multiplication of natural numbers) are defined by recursion, and their laws are then theorems, each proved by induction: addition is associative, commutative, and cancellative (Addition is associative, Addition is commutative, Addition is cancellative); multiplication distributes over addition and is associative and commutative (Distributivity and the successor law for multiplication, Multiplication is associative, Multiplication is commutative); and there are no zero divisors (The natural numbers have no zero divisors). The archetype of the method is the one-line unfolding ( from the recursion), with ( from the recursion) right behind it.
Order and its consequences. The order (Order on the natural numbers) is a linear order ( is a linear order on ) satisfying trichotomy (Trichotomy of the order on ), compatible with addition and multiplication (Order is compatible with addition, Order is compatible with multiplication) and discrete in that is the immediate successor of (Discreteness: is the immediate successor). Its deepest consequence is the well-ordering principle (The well-ordering principle): every nonempty set of naturals has a least element. From it comes strong induction (Strong (complete) induction), so ordinary induction, well-ordering and strong induction are available interchangeably in what follows.
Uniqueness. Finally, the natural numbers are pinned down: any two Peano systems are isomorphic by a unique isomorphism (Categoricity: the natural numbers are unique up to unique isomorphism), proved from the recursion theorem exactly as the uniqueness of is proved one level up. So the set-theoretic encoding chosen at the start is immaterial, and it is legitimate to speak of the natural numbers.
Why the axioms are sharp. The optional items show that the induction axiom and the injectivity of the successor cannot be dropped. Dropping induction leaves room for extra elements a proof by induction would never reach (The induction axiom is independent of the other Peano axioms); dropping injectivity of the successor allows a finite model in which distinct numbers collapse (Injectivity of the successor is independent of the other Peano axioms); and induction genuinely needs its base case, since successor-closure alone does not force a set to be all of (FALSE: successor-closure alone forces a set to be all of ).
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
Peano system
Definition
A Peano system is a triple consisting of a set , a distinguished element , and a successor function (A function is a relation with and implying ; , the value , domain and codomain), satisfying the three Peano axioms:
- (P1) Zero is not a successor. For every , .
- (P2) Successor is injective. For all , if then .
- (P3) Induction. For every subset (Subset , proper subset , and the separation notation ), if and whenever , then .
The elements of are the natural numbers of the system. We abbreviate , , , and so on.
Remarks
Axiom (P3), the induction axiom, is the load-bearing one: it says has no proper subset that contains and is closed under , so every element is reached from by finitely many successors. It is what makes definition by recursion and proof by induction legitimate (The principle of mathematical induction, The recursion theorem).
This is a structural definition: it does not say what the natural numbers are, only which laws they obey. Two questions are therefore separate and both require proof: that a Peano system exists (a model built inside set theory, The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system, from the von Neumann naturals The natural numbers (von Neumann)), and that it is unique up to a unique isomorphism (Categoricity: the natural numbers are unique up to unique isomorphism). Together these justify speaking of the natural numbers .
We use the modern -based convention (). Peano's original postulates started from ; the choice is immaterial, and starting at matches the set-theoretic construction, where .
Inductive set
Definition
Working in ZFC, for a set write for its successor (a set, by the axioms of Pairing and Union, The Axiom of Pairing: and The Axiom of Union: ). A set is inductive when
That is, contains the empty set and is closed under the successor operation.
Remarks
The Axiom of Infinity (The Axiom of Infinity: there is a set containing a set with no elements and closed under ) is precisely the assertion that an inductive set exists. Inductive sets can be large and are far from unique (if is inductive so is once closed off), so an inductive set is not yet a good definition of . The natural numbers are carved out as the smallest inductive set, the intersection of all of them (The natural numbers exist: a smallest inductive set, The natural numbers (von Neumann)); minimality is what delivers the induction principle.
Here and the successor of is , so , , : each natural number is the set of all smaller natural numbers.
The natural numbers exist: a smallest inductive set
Statement
There is a set that is inductive (Inductive set) and is a subset of every inductive set; it is unique. This is the set of natural numbers.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: ZFC; in particular the Axiom of Infinity (The Axiom of Infinity: there is a set containing a set with no elements and closed under ): there exists an inductive set; the Axiom Schema of Separation (The Axiom Schema of Separation: for each formula , ); and Extensionality (The Axiom of Extensionality: ). Write . Recall that inductive means and ().
Proof
By the Axiom of Infinity fix an inductive set .
By Separation the collection is a set.
is inductive: for every inductive (so and ), and if then for every inductive , hence for every inductive , and since and is inductive, so .
for every inductive : any satisfies by definition.
Uniqueness: if is also inductive and contained in every inductive set, then (as is inductive) and (as is inductive), so by Extensionality.
The natural numbers (von Neumann)
Definition
The set of natural numbers is the smallest inductive set (Inductive set),
which exists and is itself inductive by The natural numbers exist: a smallest inductive set (the Axiom of Infinity, The Axiom of Infinity: there is a set containing a set with no elements and closed under , supplies one inductive set to intersect within, and Separation, The Axiom Schema of Separation: for each formula , , makes the intersection a set). On we take
the distinguished element and the successor function. Thus , , , , and in general is the set of its predecessors.
Remarks
"Smallest" means for every inductive set . This minimality is exactly the induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction): a subset of that contains and is closed under is itself inductive, hence contains , hence equals .
With and so defined, satisfies the Peano axioms (Peano system, proved in The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system), so it is a model of the abstract natural numbers. By categoricity (Categoricity: the natural numbers are unique up to unique isomorphism) any other model is uniquely isomorphic to it, so the particular set-theoretic encoding chosen here is immaterial to every arithmetic and order property that follows: those are developed from the Peano axioms, not from the sets themselves.
The principle of mathematical induction
Statement
Let . If and whenever , then . Equivalently (property form): if a property satisfies and () for all , then holds for all . This is the induction principle, the basis of proof by induction.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: is the smallest inductive set (Inductive set, The natural numbers (von Neumann), The natural numbers exist: a smallest inductive set); , .
is contained in every inductive set (The natural numbers exist: a smallest inductive set).
Proof
Suppose with and ().
Then contains and is closed under , so is an inductive set.
because is a subset of every inductive set.
With by hypothesis, .
The property form is the set case with : and give and -closure, so , i.e. holds for all ; conversely the set form is the property form applied to , so the two are equivalent.
Every natural number is a transitive set and is not a member of itself
Statement
For every : (a) is transitive, i.e. ; and (b) .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: (The natural numbers (von Neumann)) with , ; the induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction). Let be the conjunction " is transitive and ".
Induction: if and , then holds for all (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : has no members, so it is vacuously transitive and .
Inductive hypothesis: holds, i.e. is transitive and .
is transitive: take ; if then by the inductive hypothesis transitivity; if then since ; either way .
: suppose , so or ; if then (as ), contradicting the inductive hypothesis ; if then by transitivity of , and since we get , again contradicting ; hence .
Hence holds; by induction [L1], for all : every natural number is transitive and satisfies .
The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system
Statement
The triple satisfies the three Peano axioms (Peano system): (P1) for all ; (P2) is injective; (P3) induction. Hence a Peano system exists.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , (The natural numbers (von Neumann)).
Induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Every natural number is transitive and satisfies (Every natural number is a transitive set and is not a member of itself).
Proof
(P3) The induction axiom holds: it is exactly the induction principle.
(P1) For every , contains , so is nonempty and .
(P2) Suppose , i.e. ; then so or , and symmetrically or ; if then and , whence by transitivity [L2] gives , and gives , contradicting [L2]; therefore and is injective.
P1, P2, P3 all hold, so is a Peano system; in particular a Peano system exists.
The recursion theorem
Statement
Let be a Peano system (Peano system), in particular the natural numbers (The natural numbers (von Neumann)). For any set , any element , and any function , there is a unique function such that and for all .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: a Peano system , a set , an element , and a function . Call a set closed when and, for all and , implies .
Induction holds in : any with that is closed under equals (axiom P3, The principle of mathematical induction).
In a Peano system (P1) and is injective (P2) (Peano system).
Proof
The set is closed, so the collection of closed subsets of is nonempty; let , which is itself closed, since if every closed contains then so does , and if then for each closed , whence for each such , so .
Let ; then since , and if with then by closure, so ; by induction , hence relates every to at least one .
Suppose with ; then still contains and is closed, since any generated pair has by P1 and so is never equal to ; this contradicts the minimality of , so is the unique second coordinate paired with .
Let ; then by step 2.2.
Assume with unique value , so and by closure; if with , then contains because , and is closed, because a generated pair with can equal only if and , but forces by injectivity, then by uniqueness at , giving , a contradiction; hence is closed and smaller than , contradicting minimality, so is the unique value at and .
By induction , so together with the totality from step 2.1 the relation is a function ; it satisfies , and closure with uniqueness gives for all .
If also satisfies and , then the set contains and is closed under , since implies , so by induction it equals , that is .
Addition is a well-defined total operation
Statement
For each there is a unique function with and . Writing , addition is a well-defined total binary operation satisfying and .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: the natural numbers with successor .
The recursion theorem: for a set , an element , and a function there is a unique with and (The recursion theorem).
is a Peano system (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Proof
Fix ; since is a Peano system [L2], apply the recursion theorem with , , and : there is a unique function with and .
Define ; since is a total function on for every , the assignment is a well-defined function .
The recursion equations become and , the defining clauses of addition.
Addition of natural numbers
Definition
Addition is defined by recursion on the second argument: for each fixed ,
Remarks
This is a definition by recursion, and it requires justification: it does not directly say what is, but pins down and reduces to . The recursion theorem (The recursion theorem) guarantees that for each there is exactly one function obeying these two equations, so is a well-defined total binary operation (Addition is a well-defined total operation).
Taking gives . The equation with gives , so : the successor is "add one", recovering the familiar reading of the Peano successor. The basic laws (commutativity, associativity, cancellation, and the left identity ) are not built in and must be proved by induction (Left identity for addition, Addition is commutative, Addition is associative, Addition is cancellative).
Multiplication is a well-defined total operation
Statement
For each there is a unique function with and . Writing , multiplication is a well-defined total binary operation satisfying and .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: with successor and addition (Addition of natural numbers).
The recursion theorem (The recursion theorem).
For fixed , the map is a function (Addition of natural numbers).
is a Peano system (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Proof
Fix ; the map , , is a well-defined function.
Since is a Peano system [L3], apply the recursion theorem with , , : there is a unique with and .
Define ; as is total for each , the assignment is a well-defined function with and .
Multiplication of natural numbers
Definition
Multiplication is defined by recursion on the second argument, using addition (Addition of natural numbers): for each fixed ,
We write for when no confusion arises.
Remarks
As with addition, this is a recursion and is legitimate by the recursion theorem (The recursion theorem): for each the map is the unique function with and , so is a well-defined total operation (Multiplication is a well-defined total operation).
The base clause builds in absorption on the right; that on the left, and , are proved by induction (Zero and one under multiplication). Multiplication distributes over addition (Distributivity and the successor law for multiplication) and is associative and commutative (Multiplication is associative, Multiplication is commutative); with The natural numbers have no zero divisors and Cancellation for multiplication by a nonzero factor this makes a commutative semiring in which cancellation holds.
No natural number equals its own successor
Statement
For every , .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: with distinguished element and successor .
for all (P1) and is injective (P2) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
The induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base case : by P1, so .
Inductive hypothesis: .
If then injectivity of gives , contradicting the hypothesis; hence .
By induction [L2], for all .
Every nonzero natural number is a successor
Statement
For every with , there exists with . Equivalently, every natural number is either or a successor.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: with distinguished element and successor . Let .
The induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base case: since .
Inductive hypothesis: .
is the successor of , so (it satisfies with ).
By induction [L1], , so every is or a successor; if then for some .
Left identity for addition
Statement
For all : . The right identity is definitional, so together with this law is a two-sided identity for addition.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Addition with and (Addition of natural numbers).
Induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : by the clause at .
Inductive hypothesis: .
Step: , using at , then the hypothesis.
By induction [L1], for all .
Left successor law for addition
Statement
For all : . (The recursion defines addition on the second argument; this is the matching law for adding on the first.)
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Addition with and (Addition of natural numbers).
Induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : by , and by , so .
Inductive hypothesis: .
Step: , applying at the outer sum, then the hypothesis, then backward inside .
By induction [L1], for all , and since was arbitrary, for all .
Addition is associative
Statement
For all : .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Addition with and (Addition of natural numbers).
Induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : and , so they are equal.
Inductive hypothesis: .
Step: , using twice and the hypothesis.
By induction [L1], for all , hence for all .
Addition is commutative
Statement
For all : .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Addition (Addition of natural numbers).
for all (Left identity for addition).
Left successor law: for all (Left successor law for addition).
Induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : and by [L1], so .
Inductive hypothesis: .
Step: by the recursion and the hypothesis; and the left successor law [L2] gives , so .
By induction [L3], for all , hence for all .
Addition is cancellative
Statement
For all : if then .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Addition (Addition of natural numbers).
is injective (P2) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : if then , since and .
Inductive hypothesis: for all , .
Step: suppose ; then by , so by injectivity [L1], hence by the hypothesis.
By induction [L2], cancellation holds for all , hence for all .
Zero and one under multiplication
Statement
For all : , , and . Here , and the clause is definitional.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: multiplication and (Multiplication of natural numbers), and addition with and (Addition of natural numbers).
for all (Left identity for addition).
The induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Right unit : , using the multiplication recursion then [L1].
Base of the left inductions: and by the clause .
Inductive hypothesis: and .
Step: , using the hypothesis and (the instance of [L1]); and , where by the addition recursion and .
By induction [L2], and for all ; together with step 1.1, for all .
Distributivity and the successor law for multiplication
Statement
For all : (left distributivity) ; and (successor-left law) .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: multiplication , and addition , (Multiplication of natural numbers, Addition of natural numbers); in particular the addition recursion is available.
Addition is associative (Addition is associative) and commutative (Addition is commutative).
The induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : , using and .
Inductive hypothesis: .
Successor-left law , by a second induction on : base gives ; assuming , the step gives , using associativity and commutativity [L1] and .
Step: , using , the multiplication recursion, the hypothesis, associativity [L1], and .
By induction [L2], for all (hence all ) and for all .
Multiplication is associative
Statement
For all : .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: multiplication and addition (Multiplication of natural numbers, Addition of natural numbers).
Left distributivity (Distributivity and the successor law for multiplication).
The induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : and , so the two sides are equal.
Inductive hypothesis: .
Step: , using the multiplication recursion, the hypothesis, left distributivity [L1], and .
By induction [L2], for all , hence for all .
Multiplication is commutative
Statement
For all : .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: multiplication (Multiplication of natural numbers).
for all (Zero and one under multiplication).
The successor-left law (Distributivity and the successor law for multiplication).
The induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
Base : and by [L1], so .
Inductive hypothesis: .
Step: , using the multiplication recursion, the hypothesis, then the successor-left law [L2].
By induction [L3], for all , hence for all .
The natural numbers have no zero divisors
Statement
For all : if then or . Equivalently, if and then .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: multiplication defined by and ; addition defined by and .
Every nonzero natural is a successor: if then for some (Every nonzero natural number is a successor).
for all (Peano axiom P1) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Proof
It suffices to prove the contrapositive: if and then .
Assume and .
By [L1] write and for some .
Then , using the multiplication recursion, , and .
By [L2], , so ; this proves the contrapositive, hence if then or .
Order on the natural numbers
Definition
Remarks
Read as " is plus something": the gap with is unique when it exists (by commutativity and cancellation, Addition is commutative, Addition is cancellative) and is written once subtraction is available. That is genuinely a linear order, reflexive, antisymmetric, transitive, and total, is proved in is a linear order on and Trichotomy of the order on ; compatibility with the arithmetic (Order is compatible with addition, Order is compatible with multiplication) and discreteness (, Discreteness: is the immediate successor) follow.
In the von Neumann model this order coincides with membership and inclusion: and , matching the picture of each natural number as the set of its predecessors (The natural numbers (von Neumann)). That coincidence is not proved here; it is derived from the additive definition above on a later page. The least-element property of every nonempty subset, the well-ordering principle (The well-ordering principle), is the deepest consequence.
Trichotomy of the order on
Statement
For all exactly one of , , holds. In particular the order (Order on the natural numbers) is total.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The order on , where means and means with (Order on the natural numbers), and addition with , (Addition of natural numbers).
Left successor law: (Left successor law for addition).
Addition is associative (Addition is associative).
Every nonzero natural is a successor: for some (Every nonzero natural number is a successor).
for every (axiom P1 of The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Cancellation: (Addition is cancellative).
Addition is commutative (Addition is commutative).
Proof
At most one of the three holds where equality is involved: forces and forces , so is incompatible with either strict relation.
The two strict relations are incompatible: if and then and with , so ; by commutativity [L7], , so by cancellation [L6]; yet [L4] gives, by the left successor law [L2], [L5], a contradiction.
For every one has , since by the recursion, with [L5].
Base case : for arbitrary , either , giving , or so [L1] with gives , that is ; so at least one of , , holds.
Inductive hypothesis: fix and assume that for every at least one of , , holds.
Successor step: for arbitrary , apply the hypothesis; if then with , and the recursion gives , so with [L5], giving ; if then , so with , giving ; if then with , so [L4], and the recursion gives while the left successor law [L2] gives , so , whence gives and gives ; in every case at least one of , , holds.
By the induction principle with base 1.4, hypothesis 1.5, and step 2.1, comparability holds for all , and with the incompatibilities 1.1 and 1.2 exactly one of , , holds, so the order is total.
is a linear order on
Statement
The relation on , where (Order on the natural numbers), is a linear (total) order: reflexive, antisymmetric, transitive, and total.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The order (Order on the natural numbers) and addition with , (Addition of natural numbers).
and addition is associative (Left identity for addition, Addition is associative).
Cancellation: (Addition is cancellative).
Every nonzero natural is a successor: if then for some (Every nonzero natural number is a successor).
Trichotomy: exactly one of , , holds (Trichotomy of the order on ).
Addition is commutative (Addition is commutative).
for every (Peano axiom P1) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Proof
Reflexive: , so .
Transitive: if and , say and , then , so .
A sum is zero only if both summands are: if with then and [L6], a contradiction, so .
Total: by trichotomy one of , , holds, and each of these gives or .
Antisymmetric: if and , say and , then ; commuting both sides [L5] gives , and cancelling the common right summand [L2] gives , hence by step 1.3 and .
Reflexivity, antisymmetry, transitivity, and totality all hold, so is a linear order on .
Order is compatible with addition
Statement
For all : ; and (Order on the natural numbers).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The order (Order on the natural numbers) and addition with , (Addition of natural numbers).
Addition is associative and commutative (Addition is associative, Addition is commutative).
Cancellation: (Addition is cancellative).
Proof
Forward: if , say , then , so .
Backward: if , say , then , so by cancellation, giving .
The strict forms follow: means and , while by cancellation, so .
Order is compatible with multiplication
Statement
For all : if then ; and if in addition and , then (Order on the natural numbers).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The order , with meaning and (Order on the natural numbers); addition with (Addition of natural numbers); and multiplication with , (Multiplication of natural numbers).
Right distributivity , from left distributivity and commutativity (Distributivity and the successor law for multiplication, Multiplication is commutative).
No zero divisors: and (The natural numbers have no zero divisors).
Cancellation for addition: (Addition is cancellative).
Addition is commutative: (Addition is commutative).
Proof
If , write ; then by right distributivity, so .
If moreover then , for would give , contradicting ; then with we get by [L2], so with ; and , since equality would give , hence by [L4] and by [L3], a contradiction; therefore .
Discreteness: is the immediate successor
Statement
For all : (Order on the natural numbers). Consequently there is no with : the successor is the immediate successor of .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The order , with meaning and (Order on the natural numbers), and addition with , (Addition of natural numbers).
Every nonzero natural is a successor: (Every nonzero natural number is a successor).
(the left successor law, Left successor law for addition) and (the addition recursion).
Cancellation: (Addition is cancellative).
for every (Peano axiom P1) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Addition is commutative: (Addition is commutative).
Proof
Forward: if then and , so for some , with since would give ; then [L1] and [L2], hence .
Backward: if then , so [L2], hence ; and , since would give , so by [L5] and by [L3], contradicting [L4]; therefore .
No satisfies : if then by the equivalence, so , contradicting ; thus is the immediate successor.
Cancellation for multiplication by a nonzero factor
Statement
For all with : if then .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: multiplication defined by and ; the order , with meaning and .
Trichotomy: for all exactly one of , , holds (Trichotomy of the order on ).
Strict monotonicity: if and then (Order is compatible with multiplication).
Proof
Suppose with but .
By trichotomy [L1], forces or .
If then by [L2] (since ); if then by [L2]; either way .
This contradicts , so the assumption is impossible and .
The well-ordering principle
Statement
Every nonempty subset has a least element: there is with for all .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A nonempty subset . Define (informally, no element of is ).
Induction principle: a subset of that contains and is closed under equals (The principle of mathematical induction).
; consequently no satisfies (Discreteness: is the immediate successor).
Exactly one of , , holds (Trichotomy of the order on ); and (Discreteness: is the immediate successor).
is injective (Peano axiom P2) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
for all (the left successor law, Left successor law for addition).
for all (Left identity for addition).
Proof
Suppose is nonempty but has no least element.
If then : by [L2] applied to and we get , say ; then [L5], so by injectivity [L4], hence .
First, : if then for all , since [L6], making a least element, contrary to the assumption; hence ; moreover forces , because would give (as [L6] with ) while gives , and [L3] admits at most one of these; so every lies outside .
Next, is closed under : assume ; if then no satisfies (else by step 1.2, so because , a contradiction), hence for all by [L3], making a least element, contrary to the assumption; therefore , and any with satisfies or ; in the second case together with gives by the definition of the strict order, hence by step 1.2 and because , while in the first case ; so every lies outside , giving .
By the induction principle [L1], from and closure under , ; then for every , taking shows , so , contradicting nonemptiness; therefore has a least element.
Strong (complete) induction
Statement
Let be a property of naturals such that for every , if holds for all then . Then holds for all . (At the hypothesis is vacuous, so is forced.)
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A property satisfying the strong-induction hypothesis : for every , .
Well-ordering: every nonempty subset of has a least element (The well-ordering principle).
Exactly one of , , holds (Trichotomy of the order on ).
Proof
Suppose fails somewhere; let , a nonempty subset of .
By well-ordering [L1], has a least element , so for every ; hence every lies outside , since would give , which [L2] does not allow alongside ; that is, holds for all .
By the hypothesis applied at , holds, so .
But by construction, a contradiction; hence is empty and holds for all .
Categoricity: the natural numbers are unique up to unique isomorphism
Statement
Let and be Peano systems (Peano system). There is a unique bijection with and for all , an isomorphism of Peano systems. Thus the natural numbers are determined up to a unique isomorphism.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Two Peano systems and .
Recursion theorem, valid in any Peano system since its proof uses only the axioms P1 to P3: for a set , an element , and , there is a unique with and (The recursion theorem).
Induction holds in each system (axiom P3): a subset containing the base point and closed under the successor is the whole system (Peano system).
Proof
Apply the recursion theorem [L1] in with , , : there is a unique with and .
Symmetrically, apply [L1] in with , , : there is a unique with and .
The composite satisfies and ; the identity satisfies the same two equations, so by induction [L2] the set is all of , i.e. .
Likewise by the same argument carried out in .
Hence is a bijection with inverse , and it preserves the base point and the successor, so it is an isomorphism of Peano systems.
Uniqueness: any with and satisfies the recursion clauses defining in step 1.1, so by the uniqueness in [L1] (equivalently contains and is closed under , hence is all of by induction [L2]).
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
from the recursion
Example
With and , the recursive definition of addition gives . This is the archetypal proof by unfolding a recursive definition.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: addition , (Addition of natural numbers); numerals , (The natural numbers (von Neumann)).
Verification
By definition and .
, by with .
, by with , .
Hence .
from the recursion
Example
With and , the recursion gives , by unfolding the successor twice down to .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: addition , (Addition of natural numbers); , (The natural numbers (von Neumann)).
Verification
Write ; then .
, by .
, applying twice.
Hence .
The induction axiom is independent of the other Peano axioms
Statement refuted
Refuted claim: any triple satisfying (P1) is not a successor and (P2) is injective automatically satisfies (P3) induction. The witness is (a disjoint union of a copy of the naturals and a copy of the integers), with base point the zero of the -copy and the usual successor on each copy separately.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: with acting as successor within each copy; the -copy's zero. Write for the two copies.
The Peano axioms P1, P2, P3 (Peano system).
itself is the standard model (The natural numbers (von Neumann)).
Counterexample
P1 holds: is the successor within each copy; is the -copy zero, which is not the successor of any element (nothing in maps to it, and maps into ), so for all .
P2 holds: is injective on and on separately, and maps each copy into itself, so is injective on .
P3 fails: let , the -copy; then and maps into (), so contains and is closed under ; the -copy is the standard model [L2].
But , since the -copy is disjoint from and nonempty.
Thus satisfies P1 and P2 but not P3, refuting the claim: induction is independent of P1 and P2 and cannot be dropped.
Injectivity of the successor is independent of the other Peano axioms
Statement refuted
Refuted claim: (P2) injectivity of follows from (P1) is not a successor together with (P3) induction. The witness is the three-element system with , , .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , base point , , , .
The Peano axioms (Peano system).
Counterexample
P1 holds: the values of are , , , none of which is , so for all .
P3 holds: if with and closed under , then forces , then , so ; thus induction holds.
P2 fails: but , so is not injective.
So satisfies P1 and P3 but not P2, refuting the claim; note the failure permits the pathology (a number that is its own successor) and a finite model in which distinct numerals collapse.
FALSE: successor-closure alone forces a set to be all of
Statement
False statement. If a set is nonempty and closed under the successor (), then . (That is, the induction principle would hold without its base case .)
Facts & Assumptions
Given: the claim above.
The induction principle requires (The principle of mathematical induction).
for all (P1) (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system).
Refutation
Take , the set of nonzero naturals; it is nonempty (for instance ).
is closed under : for any , by P1 [L2], so .
But , so ; the nonempty successor-closed set is not all of , refuting the claim.
The base case is therefore indispensable in the induction principle [L1]; successor-closure and nonemptiness do not suffice.
Sources
Standard references
Recommended treatments; not extraction sources.
- Peano axioms (Wikipedia)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §2.1 (Peano axioms)
- W. Aitken, MATH 378 Ch. 1: The Peano Axioms (CSU San Marcos)
- Axiom of infinity (Wikipedia)
- Set-theoretic definition of natural numbers (Wikipedia)
- B. Kaya, MATH 320 Set Theory (METU lecture notes)
- Mathematical induction (Wikipedia)
- Mathematics 144: Set Theory (UC Riverside lecture notes)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §2.1-2.3 (Peano axioms, recursion, arithmetic)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §2.2 (Addition)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §2.3 (Multiplication)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §2.2 (Ordering of the naturals)
- Well-ordering principle (Wikipedia)
- Peano axioms (Encyclopedia of Mathematics)
- K. Sutner, Dedekind-Peano Axioms (Carnegie Mellon)