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.
is uncountable (Cantor's nested intervals, 1874)
Statement
Let be a complete ordered field (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)). Then is uncountable (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable): there is no surjection , so is neither finite nor countably infinite.
The proof is Cantor's original argument of 1874, not the decimal diagonal. Assuming a surjection , one builds nested closed intervals with and , and then is a real number that misses. The decimal diagonal is deliberately avoided: decimal expansions are infinite series, which this library has not yet constructed, so a diagonal proof here would rest on machinery that does not exist. The diagonal argument survives in its non-circular form, on power sets, as Cantor's theorem earlier on this page; see the remarks below.
The construction uses no choice, and that is what the thirds are for. Given of length , its three closed thirds , , cannot all contain , because the first and the third are disjoint; the rule takes the first one in that fixed order which does not contain . That is a definition by cases, so the whole construction is a single application of the recursion theorem (The recursion theorem) to one explicitly given function. A version of the argument that says "pick a third avoiding " would be using dependent choice, silently and unnecessarily.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A complete ordered field , with and the order of Ordered field. For write , and write for the set of pairs coding nondegenerate closed intervals.
Least-upper-bound property: every nonempty that is bounded above has a least upper bound , an upper bound below every upper bound (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).
The least upper bound is unique when it exists (Suprema and infima are unique).
Epsilon characterisation: for a nonempty bounded above and an upper bound of , if and only if for every there is with (Epsilon characterisation of the supremum).
Order and arithmetic in an ordered field: (The multiplicative identity is positive); implies , and with implies (Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities); implies (Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order); a product of positives is positive (Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication); the order is transitive and satisfies trichotomy (Ordered field).
Recursion: for any set , and there is with and (The recursion theorem).
Induction (The principle of mathematical induction); any two naturals are comparable (Trichotomy of the order on ); the order of is the additive one, meaning for some (Order on the natural numbers, The natural numbers (von Neumann)), and it satisfies and (On the order is membership: ), so holds exactly when or .
A nonempty set is at most countable if and only if some surjection from onto it exists; uncountable means not at most countable (A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of , Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).
Proof
Suppose, for contradiction, that is at most countable. Since , it is nonempty, so [L7] provides a surjection .
Put . Adding the inequality to itself twice gives by [L4], so and ; hence for the element is positive, and .
Fix the trisection rule. Let and . Put , and ; then by step 1.2 and [L4], since . The three pairs , , all lie in and their intervals are contained in . Moreover and are disjoint, because is impossible; so fails to lie in at least one of the three. Define to be the first of , , , in that fixed order, whose interval does not contain . This is a definition by cases on the three conditions , , , so is a function and no choice is made.
Apply [L5] with , , which lies in because by [L4], and : this yields with and . An induction using [L6] shows the first coordinate of is , so we may write with , , and for every . By step 2.1 this gives , and .
For one has and , by induction on using step 3.1 and transitivity; consequently for all : if then , and if then , and any two naturals are comparable by [L6].
The set is nonempty and bounded above by by step 4.1, so [L1] gives its least upper bound , unique by [L2].
For every : , because is an upper bound of ; and , because otherwise and [L3] would produce with , contradicting from step 4.1. Hence for every .
Fix . By step 6.1 applied to , , whereas by step 3.1, so . As was arbitrary, the real number is not a value of , contradicting the surjectivity of obtained in step 1.1. Therefore no surjection exists and, being nonempty, [L7] makes uncountable.
Remarks
-
What the proof actually uses. Completeness enters once, at step 5.1, to produce ; everything else is ordered-field arithmetic and the recursion theorem. The argument therefore applies verbatim to any ordered field with the least-upper-bound property, and it fails for exactly because the supremum of the left endpoints need not exist there, which is as it should be, since is countable ( is countably infinite).
-
Why thirds and not halves. Two closed halves share the midpoint, so if happens to be that midpoint then both halves contain it and the rule "take the first closed half not containing " has nothing to return. Three closed thirds fix this: the first and the third are disjoint, so at least one of the three always misses , and listing them in a fixed order makes the selection a definition by cases rather than a choice. Open intervals would avoid the overlap too, but closed intervals are what make step 6.1 work, since the point must be allowed to be an endpoint.
-
The diagonal argument is not lost, only relocated. Cantor's theorem: , proved earlier on this page, is Cantor's diagonal argument in a setting where it needs nothing but the Power Set and Separation axioms. What is unavailable here is only the decimal diagonal, and only because decimal expansions are infinite series.
-
The choice-freeness matters beyond tidiness. The result remains available as a local ZF theorem in later arguments, including arguments that separately state a weak-choice hypothesis for assembling countable families.
-
The argument gives more than the statement does. Nothing above depends on the starting interval being , so re-seeding the recursion inside a given interval shows that every nondegenerate interval, open or closed, is uncountable. That extension is Every nondegenerate interval of is uncountable, next on this page, where it is proved rather than asserted.
Depends on
Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable
Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)
The recursion theorem
Epsilon characterisation of the supremum
Suprema and infima are unique
Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set
A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of
Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities
Ordered field
The multiplicative identity is positive
Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order
Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication
The principle of mathematical induction
The natural numbers (von Neumann)
Order on the natural numbers
Trichotomy of the order on
On the order is membership: