High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
Axiom of choice for finite sets
Introduction
The
Axiom of Choice
states that if
is a set of sets, then there exists a function
, called a
choice function
, with the property that
for each
.The statement is a consequence of the usual axioms for finite
, but does not in general follow for infinite
. A common way of weakening this statement is to require the set
to be a countably infinite set,rather than an arbitrary set. This is the
Axiom of Countable Choice
. It still does not in generalfollow from the usual axioms of set theory, but it also does not imply the full Axiom of Choice. Another route that can be taken is to put a constraint on the elements of
. By
we denote thestatement that
has a choice function if every element
has
.In this document, we are interested in
for finite
.Note that
follows from the standard axioms of set theory, as
is a well-definedchoice function.
Implication
The various statements
are not independent of each other. For instance, the simplest possibleexample is that
implies
.
implies
We have a set of four elements, call it
. We can only select from two element sets, so let us formthe set
of two element subsets of
. Then
.Let us select an element from each of the subsets (we may do this as we are assuming
). For anelement
, let
be the number of times that
was selected. Of course,
. Wemust also have that
Let
be the minimum value that
takes. Let
be the set of elements
that have
.Note that
. For if this were the case,
, which is not possible.Now
must be one of the values
,
or
. In the case it is
, we choose that value as our choicefunction on
. If
then we select the unique element of
. If
is a two element set,then we apply the choice function for two element sets to get our choice.In this manor we have defined a choice function, call it
, from sets of four elements. We haveassumed the existence of a choice function on two elements on the same family.
Step #1
In fact, the same thing can apply in a more generalcase.Let
be a set of
elements. As before, define
to bethe set of pairs of element of
. Then
. As before, define
for each
as the number of times the element
is chosen when the choicefunction for two element sets is applied to
. Let
bethe minimum value obtained by
and let
be the setof elements with
. We wish
. If it were the case, then
. It follows that
and so
would be odd.Hence we shall assume
is in fact even. Therefore it isindeed the case that
.Now
may have between
and
elements in it.If we assume
for each
then we can select an element in either case: When
select an element from
. When
select an element from
, which will then have
elements.Thus we have proven that:Suppose
and
is even. Then
for each
implies
From this is easily follows by recursion that ‘each
’ could be replaced with ‘each odd
’.
Step #2
The above generalisation worked by looking at two element subsets of
. We could just pick any size subsets providing various properties hold. The easiest way to see what properties need tohold is to just do it and see.Let
be a set of
elements. Define
to be the set of
-subsets of
. Then
.Let us assume
. Let us apply this choice function to each element of
. Define
to be thenumber of times
was picked. Define
to be the minimum value taken by
. Define
to bethe set of elements of
with
. Again, we wish to have
. For if that were the case, then:
Example
Suppose
. Then wemake the set of two element subsetsand select one from each one. Say:
Set Choice
Then
,
,
,
. It follows that our choice will be the application of the choicefunction on
, which is
.
Thus we will demand that
and so
and therefore
will be between
and
. As before, assuming each
for
will let the result follow.Therefore we weaken the condition on
in the previous theorem to:Suppose there is an
such that
. Then
and
for each
implies
Now, let us remark that a number is prime if and only if, for each
we have:
In particular, if
and
is prime, then
.
As every composite number
has a prime factor less than
, and
for
, it followsthat for every composite
, there exists some
with the property
.Therefore, we can write the result as:
Suppose
is not prime. Then
for each
implies
So, for instance,
is implied by
for
. Thus in fact we only need
,
,
and
to get
.
Step #3
Suppose
is a set such that
is true for each
. Does
then follow?The method followed previously is easily applied:
is true if 1.
There is some
such that
2.
For each
,
, either
or
Alternatively, one could invoke recursion to get a condition like:1.
There is some
such that
2.
For each
,
, either these conditions hold for
or
Writing this more symbolically, denote the condition by
:
Suppose
is a set such that
for each
. Then
implies
For instance
is true as:1.
2.
is true, as
so
is trivially true3.
is true, as
so
is trivially true
Add a Comment