Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-22
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.

A nonempty countable set has a padded enumeration in ZF

Statement

In ZF, every nonempty at most countable set D (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable) is the range of a sequence s:N→D (The natural numbers N (von Neumann)). The empty set is treated separately and is not asserted to be the range of an N-indexed sequence.

Conventions. N contains 0, and a natural number m is the set {0,…,m−1} of its predecessors. A sequence in D is a function with domain N and values in D.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A nonempty at most countable set D.

[L1]

A nonempty set A is at most countable if and only if there is a surjection s:N→A; the forward direction is the one used here and its proof is explicit in the cited item (A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of N, Injection, surjection, bijection).

[L2]

D is at most countable exactly when D is finite, that is D≈m for some m∈N, or countably infinite, that is D≈N (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).

[L3]

0=∅ and m≠0 exactly when 0∈m, for m∈N (The natural numbers N (von Neumann)).

Proof

technique · cases, on the two alternatives of at most countability supplied by [L2]
1.1givenL1L2

Assume D is nonempty and at most countable; by [L1] it suffices to produce a surjection N→D explicitly from the two alternatives of [L2].

1.2assume-caseassume-case

Case 1: assume D is countably infinite, so that there is a bijection e:N→D; case 2: assume D is finite, so that there is m∈N with a bijection e:m→D.

2.1step 1.2L2

In case 1, take s:=e; it is a function N→D and it is surjective, so its range is D; no choice was used, since e was already given.

2.2step 1.2L3

In case 2, since D is nonempty and e:m→D is bijective, m≠0: otherwise D≈m=0=∅ by [L3], contradicting that D has an element.

3.1step 2.2L2L3

In case 2, continuing, define s:N→D by the two clauses s(n):=e(n) for n∈m and s(n):=e(0) for n∈N∖m; this is well defined because m={0,…,m−1} and 0∈m by step 2.2 and [L3], so e(0)∈D is available as the constant value.

4.1step 3.1L2

In case 2, continuing, s has range D: if d∈D then d=e(k) for some k∈m because e is surjective, and then s(k)=e(k)=d by step 3.1; conversely every value of s is a value of e, hence lies in D.

5.1step 1.2step 2.1step 4.1cases-exhaustive∎

Every nonempty at most countable D therefore falls under case 1 or case 2 and is the range of the explicitly defined sequence s of step 2.1 or of step 4.1; no choice principle was used in either case.

Remarks

  • Why the statement separates the empty set. The cited equivalence of [L1] requires A≠∅: there is no function from N onto ∅. The downstream Baire theorem therefore disposes of the empty ambient space before invoking this lemma, rather than manufacturing a sequence into the empty set.

  • The padding is what makes the finite case a sequence. A finite bijection e:m→D is not defined on the whole of N; repeating its value at 0 is the canonical way to extend it, and it needs the one fact that m is nonempty.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources