Alphabeta Math
DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicableSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)judge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)verified 2026-07-29 (claude-fable-5)
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.

The dyadic rationals of [0,1][0,1], their finite levels DnD_n, and their density in [0,1][0,1]

Definition

Throughout, ι\iota is the canonical natural of R\mathbb{R} (The canonical natural ι(n)=n1F\iota(n) = n \cdot 1_F of a field), and as is standard ι(k)\iota(k) is abbreviated to kk once no ambiguity results (For every ε>0\varepsilon > 0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<ε1/n < \varepsilon). For m,nNm, n \in \mathbb{N}, mnNm^n \in \mathbb{N} is the natural-number power of Exponentiation of natural numbers, mnm^{n}, and its agreement with the integer power in R\mathbb{R}, distinct from but agreeing with the real (integer) power ana^n of Integer powers ama^m by that item's clause (d): ι(mn)=ι(m)n\iota(m^n) = \iota(m)^n. Writing 22 for ι(2)\iota(2) as just agreed, this lets 2n2^n be read as a natural number or as the real ι(2)n\iota(2)^n interchangeably.

For nNn \in \mathbb{N} put

Dn  :=  {k2n  :  kN, k2n}    [0,1],D_n \;:=\; \Big\{\, \frac{k}{2^n} \;:\; k \in \mathbb{N},\ k \le 2^n \,\Big\} \;\subseteq\; [0,1],

the order \le on the naturals kk and 2n2^n being that of Order on the natural numbers. Each DnD_n is a finite subset of [0,1][0,1] (Intervals of R\mathbb{R}: the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length) with 0,1Dn0, 1 \in D_n (the cases k=0k=0 and k=2nk=2^n); it has at most 2n+12^n+1 elements, so is finite in the sense of Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable. The dyadic rationals of [0,1][0,1] are

D  :=  nNDn    [0,1],D \;:=\; \bigcup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} D_n \;\subseteq\; [0,1],

a countable union of finite sets. Each level DnD_n is nested in the next: if k2nk \le 2^n then 2k2n+12k \le 2^{n+1} (multiplying the natural inequality by 22), and k2n=2k2n+1\dfrac{k}{2^n} = \dfrac{2k}{2^{n+1}} in R\mathbb{R} (clearing the common factor ι(2)\iota(2), licensed by Ordered field), so every element of DnD_n is exhibited as an element of Dn+1D_{n+1}; hence D0D1D2D_0 \subseteq D_1 \subseteq D_2 \subseteq \cdots and D=nDnD = \bigcup_n D_n is genuinely increasing, not merely a union.

The level decomposition, stated and discharged here because the recursion of Urysohn's lemma, under the axiom of dependent choice: in a normal space two disjoint closed sets are separated by a continuous function into [0,1][0,1], and conversely such a space is normal consumes it. For nNn \in \mathbb{N},

Dn+1  =  Dn{tj:=2j+12n+1  :  jN, j<2n},D_{n+1} \;=\; D_n \,\cup\, \Big\{\, t_j := \frac{2j+1}{2^{n+1}} \;:\; j \in \mathbb{N},\ j < 2^n \,\Big\},

and the new points tjt_j are pairwise distinct, none lies in DnD_n, and each lies strictly between the DnD_n-consecutive pair rj:=j/2nr_j := j/2^n and sj:=(j+1)/2ns_j := (j+1)/2^n. Strict betweenness: 2j<2j+1<2j+22j < 2j+1 < 2j+2, and dividing by the positive 2n+12^{n+1} preserves strict order (Ordered field), so rj=2j/2n+1<tj<(2j+2)/2n+1=sjr_j = 2j/2^{n+1} < t_j < (2j+2)/2^{n+1} = s_j. Distinctness: j2j+1j \mapsto 2j+1 is injective. Disjointness from DnD_n: tj=k/2nt_j = k/2^n with k2nk \le 2^n would give 2j+1=2k2j+1 = 2k after clearing the positive factor 1/2n+11/2^{n+1} and applying injectivity of ι\iota; but kjk \le j gives 2k2j<2j+12k \le 2j < 2j+1, and kj+1k \ge j+1 gives 2k2j+2>2j+12k \ge 2j+2 > 2j+1, so no such kk exists. The union is all of Dn+1D_{n+1}: given k/2n+1k/2^{n+1} with k2n+1k \le 2^{n+1}, the set {iN:2i>k}\{\, i \in \mathbb{N} : 2i > k \,\} is nonempty (2(k+1)=2k+2>k2(k+1) = 2k+2 > k), so by The well-ordering principle it has a least element i0i_0, and i01i_0 \ge 1 since 20=0k2 \cdot 0 = 0 \le k; writing i0=j+1i_0 = j+1 (Every nonzero natural number is a successor) gives 2jk<2j+22j \le k < 2j+2, so k=2jk = 2j or k=2j+1k = 2j+1. In the first case k/2n+1=j/2nDnk/2^{n+1} = j/2^n \in D_n (with j2nj \le 2^n since 2j2n+12j \le 2^{n+1}); in the second it is tjt_j (with j<2nj < 2^n since 2j+12n+12j+1 \le 2^{n+1} forces 2j<2n+12j < 2^{n+1}). Finally, any two elements of DD lie together in a common level: one lies in some DmD_m and the other in some DmD_{m'}, and both then lie in Dmax(m,m)D_{\max(m,m')} by the nesting just proved.

DD is dense in [0,1][0,1]: for every x[0,1]x \in [0,1] and every real ε>0\varepsilon > 0 there is rDr \in D with xr<ε|x - r| < \varepsilon. First, a growth fact about natural-number powers, proved by induction on nn (The principle of mathematical induction): 2nn+12^n \ge n+1 for every nNn \in \mathbb{N}. At n=0n=0, 20=1=0+12^0 = 1 = 0+1. If 2nn+12^n \ge n+1, then 2n+1=2n2=2n+2n(n+1)+(n+1)=2n+2n+2=(n+1)+12^{n+1} = 2^n \cdot 2 = 2^n + 2^n \ge (n+1) + (n+1) = 2n+2 \ge n+2 = (n+1)+1, the middle inequality adding the inductive hypothesis to itself and the last holding since n0n \ge 0; both steps use only that the order of N\mathbb{N} is compatible with addition (Order on the natural numbers). Transporting the inequality into R\mathbb{R} by the order-preserving ι\iota (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing) gives ι(2n)ι(n+1)=ι(n)+1\iota(2^n) \ge \iota(n+1) = \iota(n)+1 for every nn.

Now fix x[0,1]x \in [0,1] and a real ε>0\varepsilon > 0. By For every ε>0\varepsilon > 0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<ε1/n < \varepsilon fix a natural m1m \ge 1 with 1/m<ε1/m < \varepsilon. Put n:=mn := m; then ι(2n)ι(n)+1=ι(m)+1>ι(m)>0\iota(2^n) \ge \iota(n)+1 = \iota(m)+1 > \iota(m) > 0, so by Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order 0<1/2n<1/m<ε0 < 1/2^n < 1/m < \varepsilon. Consider S:={kN:xk/2n}S := \{\, k \in \mathbb{N} : x \le k/2^n \,\}. It is nonempty, since k=2nk=2^n satisfies x1=2n/2nx \le 1 = 2^n/2^n because x[0,1]x \in [0,1]; so by The well-ordering principle SS has a least element k0k_0, and k02nk_0 \le 2^n because 2nS2^n \in S. If k0=0k_0 = 0 then x0x \le 0, and x0x \ge 0 since x[0,1]x \in [0,1], so x=0=0/2nDnDx = 0 = 0/2^n \in D_n \subseteq D, within distance 0<ε0 < \varepsilon of itself. If k01k_0 \ge 1 then k01Nk_0 - 1 \in \mathbb{N} and, by minimality of k0k_0, k01Sk_0 - 1 \notin S, that is x>(k01)/2n=k0/2n1/2nx > (k_0-1)/2^n = k_0/2^n - 1/2^n; combined with xk0/2nx \le k_0/2^n this gives xk0/2n1/2n<ε|x - k_0/2^n| \le 1/2^n < \varepsilon, and r:=k0/2nDnDr := k_0/2^n \in D_n \subseteq D since k02nk_0 \le 2^n. Either way some rDr \in D satisfies xr<ε|x-r| < \varepsilon.

Remarks

  • Every dyadic rational of [0,1][0,1] other than 00 and 11 lies strictly between them, since 0<k/2n<10 < k/2^n < 1 exactly when 0<k<2n0 < k < 2^n.

  • The finite levels, not DD itself, are what the construction of Urysohn's lemma recurses on. DD is presented here as the increasing union nDn\bigcup_n D_n precisely so that a family indexed by DD can be built one finite level at a time, each level adding only finitely many new indices to the one before.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 77 results over 19 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources