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.
An aleph omega plus one scale on an infinite set of successor alephs
Statement
Assume AC. There is an infinite and a sequence in which is strictly increasing and cofinal modulo finite sets. In particular the true cofinality of this reduced product is . The assertion chooses an infinite coordinate subset; it does not assert the same cofinality on the full sequence of successor alephs.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC. Put , and .
There is a strict eventual -chain in satisfying for every uncountable regular (A long chain with club continuity below aleph omega).
On countably many coordinates, for uncountable regular gives the bounding-projection property (Strongly increasing subsequences force a bounding projection).
The projection property and regular length greater than give an exact least bound with positive limit values. Additional projection properties force corresponding eventual lower bounds on coordinate cofinalities; exactness restricts to positive supports (Bounding projections produce an exact upper bound with large coordinate cofinalities).
Cofinality of a limit ordinal is regular and has an increasing cofinal enumeration; fewer than a regular cardinal's many ordinals below it are bounded (; and ; for a limit ordinal the value is an infinite cardinal with , so it is regular; and every cofinal subset of has cardinality at least , a value that is attained, (c)–(d)).
Successor alephs are regular under AC, including , and the infinite cardinals below are the finite-index alephs ( is regular in ZF; assuming the Axiom of Choice every successor aleph is regular; , so is singular, and under choice it is the least singular infinite cardinal).
A specified transfinite recursion determines its sequence (Transfinite recursion).
A scale is a strict cofinal chain of regular length under the ideal comparisons (Reduced products, true cofinality and scales).
AC supplies simultaneous cofinal enumerations and choices of witnesses in set-sized products (The Axiom of Choice).
Proof
We first give the cofinal-suborder transfer used below. Suppose an eventual-comparison product has a strict cofinal regular -chain , and preserves and reflects weak and strict comparisons and has a cofinal image. Every family of fewer than elements in has a strict bound: choose for each member a weakly dominating chain term, bound these indices below by F4 and take a later term. To build a chain in , recurse through , strictly bounding all earlier chosen image elements together with by this rule, then choosing an image element weakly above that strict bound. A1 fixes a choice function on the nonempty witness subsets before the F6 recursion. The new image element strictly exceeds every predecessor and ; hence the image chain is strict and cofinal in , and reflection makes its preimage a strict cofinal chain in . No cofinal family of size less than exists in either order: in the strict bound just constructed contradicts cofinality, and a cofinal family in would map to one in . Thus this procedure transfers precisely the regular true cofinality . It uses no assertion that a ceiling map preserves strict inequalities.
Take the chain from F1. F2 gives all its uncountable regular projection properties below , in particular at . By F5, is regular and greater than , so F3 gives an exact least bound with positive limit values. The function is a pointwise bound; leastness gives . Set , so and remains positive and limit-valued everywhere. Exactness and all eventual coordinate-cofinality conclusions are unchanged. Apply the conclusion and discard its finite exceptional set, leaving infinite , with for every . For all these coordinates : a cofinal subset of has size at most . Further, for each finite , the cofinality bound holds outside a finite set (using when ). Hence eventually. In particular tends to in the sense of eventually exceeding every smaller cardinal. Restriction to preserves exactness by F3.
Every , since . After restriction to , reset its finitely many failure coordinates to zero to obtain . These resets preserve strict comparisons. Given in that product, exactness gives for some , so the reset chain is cofinal. By F4 and A1 choose increasing cofinal maps . The map from into preserves and reflects pointwise comparisons at every coordinate, hence also eventual weak and strict comparisons. Its image is cofinal: for each take the least with , which exists by cofinality. Apply step 1.1 to obtain true cofinality on modulo finite sets.
Put . Each is a regular cardinal by F4, at least and less than . Each fiber is finite: choose finite with ; step 1.2 gives outside a finite set. Consequently the preimage of a finite subset of is finite. Conversely if is infinite, its preimage is infinite, because the image of a finite set cannot be infinite and is onto . For , define . Its comparison failure sets are exactly the preimages of those on ; thus preserves and reflects eventual weak and strict comparisons. Its image is cofinal: for put
Every fiber is nonempty and finite, and its values are below the infinite cardinal , so and at each coordinate. Thus and pointwise. Finally is unbounded in by step 1.2, so it is infinite. [step 1.2, F4, F5]
Apply the transfer of step 1.1 to the cofinal embedding of step 2.2 and the strict cofinal chain of step 2.1. This gives a scale of length on modulo finite sets, with no shorter cofinal family. Each is a unique with finite , by F5 and the bound . Set . The bijection from infinite to carries finite sets to finite sets in both directions and carries product functions to product functions. Reindexing the scale therefore preserves its strict comparisons and cofinality, giving the stated sequence on . This proves the assertion, including its true cofinality claim. QED.
Depends on
- A long chain with club continuity below aleph omega
- Strongly increasing subsequences force a bounding projection
- Bounding projections produce an exact upper bound with large coordinate cofinalities
- Reduced products, true cofinality and scales
- $\operatorname{cf}(\alpha) \le \alpha$; $\operatorname{cf}(0) = 0$ and $\operatorname{cf}(\alpha + 1) = 1$; for a limit ordinal $\lambda$ the value $\operatorname{cf}(\lambda)$ is an infinite cardinal with $\operatorname{cf}(\operatorname{cf}(\lambda)) = \operatorname{cf}(\lambda)$, so it is regular; and every cofinal subset of $\lambda$ has cardinality at least $\operatorname{cf}(\lambda)$, a value that is attained
- $\aleph_0$ is regular in ZF; assuming the Axiom of Choice every successor aleph $\aleph_{\alpha+1}$ is regular; $\operatorname{cf}(\aleph_\omega) = \aleph_0$, so $\aleph_\omega$ is singular, and under choice it is the least singular infinite cardinal
- Transfinite recursion
- The Axiom of Choice
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
38 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Abraham and Magidor, Cardinal Arithmetic, Lemma 2.3 pp. 12–13 and Exercise 2.25/Theorem 2.26 p. 25 (standard reference, not scraped)