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.
Progressive pcf has a maximum and continuous cutoff ideals
Statement
Assume AC. Every nonempty progressive set of infinite regular cardinals has a largest possible cofinality , and
For every nonzero cardinal ,
For every nonzero limit cardinal one also has . The maximum assertion excludes ; for that support PCF is empty, the cardinal bound and both stated positive-cutoff identities remain valid. At either displayed union is empty whereas , so no zero-cutoff union identity is asserted.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC and a nonempty progressive , until the empty-support clause is treated. All ideal cutoffs below are cardinal cutoffs.
PCF is a set of infinite regular cardinals, contains , is monotone, and equals for finite (Progressive products and true cofinality transfers).
is increasing with , is proper for , and consists of with ; (Pcf cofinality ideals and cutoff conventions).
An ultrafilter has cofinality at least exactly when it avoids , and has cofinality equal to exactly when it avoids and meets (Pcf ideal directedness and ultrafilter cofinality cutoffs).
Under AC every proper filter extends to an ultrafilter (The ultrafilter lemma, from the Axiom of Choice: every filter extends to an ultrafilter).
Injections of well-orderable sets give cardinal inequalities (Commutativity, associativity, distributivity and monotonicity of and , the unit laws, the two exponent laws, and if and only if injects into , (a)).
AC gives simultaneous choices from nonempty sets (The Axiom of Choice).
Proof
Put , a nonempty set by F1, and . This is an ideal: it contains the empty set because ; it is downward closed by F2; and if two members lie in the ideals with cutoffs , both lie in the ideal with the larger of those two cutoffs, which also contains their union. It is proper because every constituent omits . Its dual contains , omits the empty set and is upward closed and closed under finite intersections, by complementing the ideal axioms. It is therefore a proper filter. F4 supplies an ultrafilter . This avoids , since containing both and its complement would put the empty set in .
For each there is an ultrafilter of cofinality , and F3 supplies . The corresponding nonempty witness sets lie in ; AC selects simultaneously. If in , every member of is at most , so , whereas . Thus . This injection gives by F5: subsets correspond bijectively to their characteristic functions, and a bijection transports these to binary functions on .
Put by F1. For each , step 1.1 shows that avoids ; hence by F3. Since itself belongs to , it is its maximum. In particular the maximum is infinite regular, not merely a supremum outside PCF. This proof applies to every nonempty progressive subset , since ; the first inequality follows from its inclusion by F5.
Fix . If nonempty , step 2.1 applied to gives the cardinal . Every possible cofinality of is at most , hence . For , use and from F1. Conversely, if with cardinal , every member of is at most and hence below ; thus . This proves both inclusions in the first identity for every nonzero cutoff, including one and singular cutoffs.
If is a nonzero limit cardinal, it is infinite. For nonempty take as in step 3.1; since is not a successor, , and . For the empty choose cutoff zero, which is below and whose ideal contains the empty set. The reverse inclusion follows from monotonicity of the cutoff ideals, proving the second identity. If , F1 gives empty PCF and every cutoff ideal equals ; each positive-cutoff union has an index (zero), so equals that same ideal, and gives the cardinal bound. If is finite nonempty, F1 gives , whose largest element is its maximum, in agreement with step 2.1. Finally at cutoff zero, F1 and singleton monotonicity show that no nonempty subset is null; hence , while the union indexed below zero has no members. This verifies the stated exceptions. QED.
Depends on
- Progressive products and true cofinality transfers
- Pcf cofinality ideals and cutoff conventions
- Pcf ideal directedness and ultrafilter cofinality cutoffs
- The Axiom of Choice
- $\operatorname{cf}(\alpha) \le \alpha$; $\operatorname{cf}(0) = 0$ 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
- Commutativity, associativity, distributivity and monotonicity of $\oplus$ and $\otimes$, the unit laws, the two exponent laws, and $\kappa \le \lambda$ if and only if $\kappa$ injects into $\lambda$
- Absorption: for cardinals $\kappa, \lambda$ with $\kappa$ infinite and $\lambda \le \kappa$, $\kappa \oplus \lambda = \kappa$, and $\kappa \otimes \lambda = \kappa$ when $\lambda \ne 0$
- The ultrafilter lemma, from the Axiom of Choice: every filter extends to an ultrafilter
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
52 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, Theorem 3.6, Corollary 3.7 and Exercise 3.8, p. 34 (standard reference, not scraped)