Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge 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 long ray is a linear continuum, hence connected; every one of its at most countable subsets is bounded above, assuming countable choice

Statement

Let R=ω1×[0,1) be the closed long ray with its lexicographic order and its order topology (The closed long ray ω1×[0,1) under the lexicographic order, and the long line, with the order topology). Then:

  1. R is a linear continuum (The order topology of a linearly ordered set, with the open rays as a subbasis; order-convex sets, order-density, the least upper bound property, and linear continua): it has at least two elements, it is order-dense, and it has the least upper bound property.
  2. R is connected, and so is every order-convex subset of R; in particular every initial segment [0R,x]={ y∈R:y≤x } is connected.
  3. Assuming the Axiom of Countable Choice ACω (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)): every at most countable subset of R (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable) has an upper bound in R; so no at most countable subset of R is unbounded above.

Claims 1 and 2 are theorems of ZF. Claim 3 carries the hypothesis because it is inherited whole from Assuming countable choice: every at most countable subset of ω1 is bounded below ω1, so no at most countable subset of ω1 is cofinal in it, and a supremum of at most countably many at most countable ordinals is at most countable, whose own statement carries it, and it is spent at exactly one step below.

Nothing here says R is path-connected, and this proof gives no path between two of its points; that question needs an order isomorphism of each initial segment with [0,1], which is not constructed on this page.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The closed long ray R=ω1×[0,1) with the lexicographic order and its order topology.

[A1]

The lexicographic order on R is a total order with least element 0R=(0,0); (α,s)<(β,t) means α<β, or α=β and s<t; every s occurring satisfies 0≤s<1 (The closed long ray ω1×[0,1) under the lexicographic order, and the long line, with the order topology, Partial order and partially ordered set, Intervals of R: the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).

[A2]

For a set A of ordinals, ⋃A is an ordinal, it is an upper bound of A under ≤, and it is ≤ every upper bound of A; α⊆β holds exactly when α≤β; α+ is an ordinal with α<α+, and any two ordinals are comparable (Basic closure properties of ordinals, Trichotomy and well-ordering of the ordinals, Ordinal (von Neumann), Upper bound, least upper bound, and strict upper bound).

[A3]

The elements of ω1 are exactly the at most countable ordinals, and ω1 is a limit ordinal, so α∈ω1 implies α+∈ω1 (The first uncountable ordinal ω1:=ℵ(ω), ω1 is uncountable, every ordinal below it is at most countable, it is a cardinal and a limit ordinal, and its existence is a theorem of ZF, Successor and limit ordinals).

[A4]

R has the least upper bound property and least upper bounds in it are unique; for reals s<t one has s<(s+t)/2<t; 0≤s<1 gives s<(s+1)/2<1 (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Suprema and infima are unique, Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).

[A7]

A nonempty set is at most countable exactly when some surjection N→ it exists (A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of N, Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

R has at least two elements, namely (0,0) and (0,1/2), which differ and satisfy (0,0)<(0,1/2) by [A1] and [A4].

A1A4
1.2

R is order-dense. Let (α,s)<(β,t). If α=β then s<t and (α,(s+t)/2) lies strictly between, by [A4]. If α<β then s<(s+1)/2<1 by [A4], so (α,(s+1)/2)∈R lies strictly above (α,s) and strictly below (β,t), its first coordinate being α<β.

A1A4
1.3

Let S⊆R be nonempty with an upper bound (β0,t0), and put A:={ α∈ω1:(α,s)∈S for some s }, a nonempty set of ordinals with α≤β0 for every α∈A; so γ:=⋃A is an ordinal with γ≤β0, hence γ∈ω1 by [A2] and [A3].

A1A2A3
1.4

For claim 3 let D⊆R be at most countable. If D=∅ then 0R is an upper bound of D by [A1] and there is nothing more to prove, so assume D≠∅ and let AD:={ α:(α,s)∈D for some s }, a nonempty subset of ω1.

A1A7
2.1

Suppose first γ∈A, and put T:={ s∈[0,1):(γ,s)∈S }, which is nonempty and bounded above by 1; let u:=sup⁡T in R, which exists and is unique by [A4], with 0≤u≤1.

step 1.3A4
2.2

Suppose instead γ∉A; then every α∈A satisfies α<γ, since α≤γ by [A2] and α≠γ.

step 1.3A2
2.3

AD is at most countable: by [A7] there is a surjection f:N→D, and composing it with the first-coordinate map gives a surjection N→AD, so [A7] applies again.

step 1.4A7
3.1

In the case of step 2.1 with u<1, the element (γ,u)∈R is the least upper bound of S: it bounds S, since (α,s)∈S has α≤γ and, when α=γ, s∈T so s≤u; and any upper bound (β,t) of S has β≥γ, because S contains an element with first coordinate γ, and if β=γ then t bounds T so t≥u.

step 2.1A1A4
3.2

In the case of step 2.1 with u=1, the element (γ+,0)∈R is the least upper bound of S: it bounds S, since every (α,s)∈S has α≤γ<γ+; and an upper bound (β,t) cannot have β<γ, S containing an element with first coordinate γ, nor β=γ, since then t would bound T and give t≥u=1 against t<1; so β>γ, that is β≥γ+ by [A2], and (β,t)≥(γ+,0). Here γ+∈ω1 by [A3].

step 2.1A1A2A3A4
3.3

In the case of step 2.2, the element (γ,0)∈R is the least upper bound of S: it bounds S, since every (α,s)∈S has α<γ; and if an upper bound (β,t) had β<γ=⋃A then β would not bound A by [A2], so some α∈A has β<α and the corresponding element of S exceeds (β,t) — impossible; so β≥γ and (β,t)≥(γ,0).

step 2.2A1A2
3.4

By [A6] the ordinal μ:=sup⁡AD lies in ω1 and satisfies α≤μ for every α∈AD; this is the one step at which ACω is spent.

step 2.3A6
4.1

Steps 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 exhaust the cases and give a least upper bound in each, so R has the least upper bound property; with steps 1.1 and 1.2 this makes R a linear continuum by [A5]. This is claim 1.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 3.1step 3.2step 3.3A5
5.1

Claim 2 follows: R is connected and every order-convex subset of R is connected by [A5], and each initial segment [0R,x] is order-convex, being defined by an inequality closed under passing to intermediate points.

step 4.1A5
6.1

Then μ+∈ω1 by [A3], and (μ+,0)∈R is an upper bound of D: every (α,s)∈D has α∈AD, hence α≤μ<μ+ by [A2] and step 3.4, so (α,s)<(μ+,0). This is claim 3.

step 1.4step 3.4A1A2A3∎

Remarks

Depends on

Used by

Cited to discharge well-definedness by The closed long ray ω₁ × [0,1) under the lexicographic order, and the long line, with the order topology.

Dependency tree · two levels

58 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