Ttdfjt

Missing root certificates on Windows Server 2016 (fresh install)

On what to compliment someone with anorexia in order to improve their body image?

Does a return economy-class seat between London and San Francisco release 5.28 tonnes of CO2 equivalents?

Compiling all Exception messages into a string

By RAW, how can Prestidigitation create sound?

How do I create a new column in a dataframe from an existing column using conditions?

How did they film the Invisible Man being invisible, in 1933?

Can European countries bypass the EU and make their own individual trade deal with the U.S.?

Put my student loan in parents’ second mortgage - help?

Converting Geographic Coordinates into Lambert2008 coordinates

Checkmate in 1 on a Tangled Board

Why can't you move another user's directory when you can move their file?

How do ohm meters measure high resistances?

Fully submerged water bath for stove top baking?

Ways to get SMD resistors from a strip

Can I use Alchemist's fire to turn my sword into a virtual Flame Blade?

Why isn't UDP with reliability (implemented at Application layer) a substitute of TCP?

If two black hole event horizons overlap (touch) can they ever separate again?

Reusable spacecraft: why still have fairings detach, instead of open/close?

Alien life interbreeding with Earth life

A quine of sorts

Can dual citizens open crypto exchange accounts where U.S. citizens are prohibited?

Two palindromes are not enough

My colleague is constantly blaming me for his errors

Proving a certain type of topology is discrete without the axiom of choice

Topological proof on discrete topology where $X$ is infiniteIf totally disconnectedness does not imply the discrete topology, then what is wrong with my argument?Topological proof on discrete topology where $X$ is infiniteDiscrete topology on infinite setsWith out the axiom of choice is the following true: If a topology on $X$ contains every infinite subset of $X$, then this is the discrete topology.The bases for the discrete topologyShow that $mathcal T$ is the discrete topology on $X$.Co-countable topology, anticompact and axiom of choiceAre singletons compact in the discrete topology?Why isn't the Cantor set a discrete topology?The Discrete topology on $mathbbR$ is a $T_1$ space and not limit point Compact

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

9

2

$begingroup$

I came across the following exercise: suppose we have a topology on an infinite set $X$ which contains all infinite subsets of $X$. Prove that the topology is discrete.

Here's a way to approach this: pick two disjoint infinite subsets $A$ and $B$ of $X$. For any $xin X$, $Acupleftxright$ and $Bcupleftxright$ are open and so is their intersection, which is just $leftxright$. Hence all singletons are open and the topology is discrete.

This proof is essentially the same as the one here.

However, I don't quite like this argument, mainly because of the step where we say "pick two disjoint infinite subsets of $X$". This isn't really a problem in ZFC since it's possible to prove that every infinite set has an infinite countable subset and after this is established, picking $A$ and $B$ is simple. But what if I'm working without the axiom of choice?

So, my question is: can it be proved without AC that every infinite set contains two disjoint infinite subsets or is it perhaps possible to avoid this altogether by proving the topology is discrete in another way (not reliant on AC)?

general-topology set-theory axiom-of-choice

share|cite|improve this question

edited Jun 20 at 17:53

J_P

asked Jun 20 at 17:18

J_PJ_P

1,25111 silver badge1313 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  If I recall correctly (this isn't an answer because I'm not sure) it is consistent with ZF that there is an infinite set such that every subset is finite or cofinite. If such a set exists, then the set of infinite subsets of $X$ (+ $emptyset$) is a topology (stable under finite unions because cofinite sets are), and it's not discrete
  $endgroup$
  – Max
  Jun 20 at 17:28
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

9

2

$begingroup$

I came across the following exercise: suppose we have a topology on an infinite set $X$ which contains all infinite subsets of $X$. Prove that the topology is discrete.

Here's a way to approach this: pick two disjoint infinite subsets $A$ and $B$ of $X$. For any $xin X$, $Acupleftxright$ and $Bcupleftxright$ are open and so is their intersection, which is just $leftxright$. Hence all singletons are open and the topology is discrete.

This proof is essentially the same as the one here.

However, I don't quite like this argument, mainly because of the step where we say "pick two disjoint infinite subsets of $X$". This isn't really a problem in ZFC since it's possible to prove that every infinite set has an infinite countable subset and after this is established, picking $A$ and $B$ is simple. But what if I'm working without the axiom of choice?

So, my question is: can it be proved without AC that every infinite set contains two disjoint infinite subsets or is it perhaps possible to avoid this altogether by proving the topology is discrete in another way (not reliant on AC)?

general-topology set-theory axiom-of-choice

share|cite|improve this question

edited Jun 20 at 17:53

J_P

asked Jun 20 at 17:18

J_PJ_P

1,25111 silver badge1313 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  If I recall correctly (this isn't an answer because I'm not sure) it is consistent with ZF that there is an infinite set such that every subset is finite or cofinite. If such a set exists, then the set of infinite subsets of $X$ (+ $emptyset$) is a topology (stable under finite unions because cofinite sets are), and it's not discrete
  $endgroup$
  – Max
  Jun 20 at 17:28
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I came across the following exercise: suppose we have a topology on an infinite set $X$ which contains all infinite subsets of $X$. Prove that the topology is discrete.

Here's a way to approach this: pick two disjoint infinite subsets $A$ and $B$ of $X$. For any $xin X$, $Acupleftxright$ and $Bcupleftxright$ are open and so is their intersection, which is just $leftxright$. Hence all singletons are open and the topology is discrete.

This proof is essentially the same as the one here.

However, I don't quite like this argument, mainly because of the step where we say "pick two disjoint infinite subsets of $X$". This isn't really a problem in ZFC since it's possible to prove that every infinite set has an infinite countable subset and after this is established, picking $A$ and $B$ is simple. But what if I'm working without the axiom of choice?

So, my question is: can it be proved without AC that every infinite set contains two disjoint infinite subsets or is it perhaps possible to avoid this altogether by proving the topology is discrete in another way (not reliant on AC)?

general-topology set-theory axiom-of-choice

share|cite|improve this question

edited Jun 20 at 17:53

J_P

asked Jun 20 at 17:18

J_PJ_P

1,25111 silver badge1313 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this question

edited Jun 20 at 17:53

J_P

asked Jun 20 at 17:18

J_PJ_P

1,25111 silver badge1313 bronze badges

share|cite|improve this question

edited Jun 20 at 17:53

J_P

asked Jun 20 at 17:18

J_PJ_P

1,25111 silver badge1313 bronze badges

asked Jun 20 at 17:18

J_PJ_P

1,25111 silver badge1313 bronze badges

asked Jun 20 at 17:18

J_PJ_P

1,25111 silver badge1313 bronze badges

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

10

$begingroup$

No, it is (relatively) consistent with ZF that there exists an infinite set that does not have two disjoint infinite subsets. Such as set is called amorphous.

If $X$ is an amorphous set, then the topology you describe is the cofinite topology, which is not discrete.

So you need some form of choice to prove your goal.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered Jun 20 at 17:25

Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

250k1717 gold badges329329 silver badges570570 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Interesting....
  $endgroup$
  – Randall
  Jun 20 at 17:29
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  This is surprising! I guess with or without AC, strange things happen
  $endgroup$
  – J_P
  Jun 20 at 17:33
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @J_P without, more strange things, I think.
  $endgroup$
  – Henno Brandsma
  Jun 20 at 22:30
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @DanielWainfleet So if I understand correctly, there exists a model of ZF (a model being a particular realization of ZF) in which, say, amorphous sets exist, but there is no way to prove their existence just from ZF axioms alone.
  $endgroup$
  – J_P
  Jun 21 at 14:25
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @J_P: Correct -- you can't prove the existence of such sets from ZF, because such a proof would still be valid in ZFC (adding more axioms can never rob an existing proof of validity) and create a contradiction with AC proving that amorphous sets don't exist.
  $endgroup$
  – Henning Makholm
  Jun 21 at 14:30
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3268870%2fproving-a-certain-type-of-topology-is-discrete-without-the-axiom-of-choice%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

10

$begingroup$

No, it is (relatively) consistent with ZF that there exists an infinite set that does not have two disjoint infinite subsets. Such as set is called amorphous.

If $X$ is an amorphous set, then the topology you describe is the cofinite topology, which is not discrete.

So you need some form of choice to prove your goal.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered Jun 20 at 17:25

Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

250k1717 gold badges329329 silver badges570570 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Interesting....
  $endgroup$
  – Randall
  Jun 20 at 17:29
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  This is surprising! I guess with or without AC, strange things happen
  $endgroup$
  – J_P
  Jun 20 at 17:33
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @J_P without, more strange things, I think.
  $endgroup$
  – Henno Brandsma
  Jun 20 at 22:30
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @DanielWainfleet So if I understand correctly, there exists a model of ZF (a model being a particular realization of ZF) in which, say, amorphous sets exist, but there is no way to prove their existence just from ZF axioms alone.
  $endgroup$
  – J_P
  Jun 21 at 14:25
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @J_P: Correct -- you can't prove the existence of such sets from ZF, because such a proof would still be valid in ZFC (adding more axioms can never rob an existing proof of validity) and create a contradiction with AC proving that amorphous sets don't exist.
  $endgroup$
  – Henning Makholm
  Jun 21 at 14:30
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

10

$begingroup$

No, it is (relatively) consistent with ZF that there exists an infinite set that does not have two disjoint infinite subsets. Such as set is called amorphous.

If $X$ is an amorphous set, then the topology you describe is the cofinite topology, which is not discrete.

So you need some form of choice to prove your goal.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered Jun 20 at 17:25

Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

250k1717 gold badges329329 silver badges570570 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Interesting....
  $endgroup$
  – Randall
  Jun 20 at 17:29
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  This is surprising! I guess with or without AC, strange things happen
  $endgroup$
  – J_P
  Jun 20 at 17:33
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @J_P without, more strange things, I think.
  $endgroup$
  – Henno Brandsma
  Jun 20 at 22:30
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @DanielWainfleet So if I understand correctly, there exists a model of ZF (a model being a particular realization of ZF) in which, say, amorphous sets exist, but there is no way to prove their existence just from ZF axioms alone.
  $endgroup$
  – J_P
  Jun 21 at 14:25
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @J_P: Correct -- you can't prove the existence of such sets from ZF, because such a proof would still be valid in ZFC (adding more axioms can never rob an existing proof of validity) and create a contradiction with AC proving that amorphous sets don't exist.
  $endgroup$
  – Henning Makholm
  Jun 21 at 14:30
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

$begingroup$

No, it is (relatively) consistent with ZF that there exists an infinite set that does not have two disjoint infinite subsets. Such as set is called amorphous.

If $X$ is an amorphous set, then the topology you describe is the cofinite topology, which is not discrete.

So you need some form of choice to prove your goal.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered Jun 20 at 17:25

Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

250k1717 gold badges329329 silver badges570570 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

answered Jun 20 at 17:25

Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

250k1717 gold badges329329 silver badges570570 bronze badges

answered Jun 20 at 17:25

Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

250k1717 gold badges329329 silver badges570570 bronze badges

answered Jun 20 at 17:25

Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

250k1717 gold badges329329 silver badges570570 bronze badges