Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Math 310 Class Notes 4: The Well-ordering Principle, Lecture notes of Mathematics

Well-ordering principle: Every nonempty subset T of N has a least element. That is, there is an m ∈ T such that m ≤ n for all n ∈ T.

Typology: Lecture notes

2021/2022

Uploaded on 09/12/2022

kavinsky
kavinsky 🇺🇸

4.4

(28)

286 documents

1 / 2

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Math 310 Class Notes 4: The Well-ordering Principle
Well-ordering principle: Every nonempty subset Tof Nhas a least
element. That is, there is an mTsuch that mnfor all nT.
Intutively clear as it may seem at the first glance, this principle turns
out to be logically equivalent to the mathematical induction, the fifth
axiom of Peano, which is quite surprising.
Theorem 1. The mathematical induction is logically equivalent to the
well-ordering principle.
Proof. Part I. We show the well-ordering principle implies the math-
ematical induction.
Let SNbe such that 1 Sand kSimplies k0S. We want
to establish that S=Nby the well-ordering principle.
Suppose N\Sis not empty. Then by the well-ordering principle there
is a least element mN\S. Since 1 Swe know 1 /N\S. Therefore
m6= 1 and so by one of the homework 2 problems there is some qN
such that m=q0=q+ 1, which implies q < m by the definition of
<. We conclude that qS; or else we would have qN\Sand so
mwould not be the least element of N\S, which is absurd. However,
since Shas the property that kSimplies k0S, we conclude that
m=q0Sbecause qS. This contradicts mN\S.
The contradiction establishes that N\Sis empty. Hence S=N.
Part II. We show the mathematical induction implies the well-ordering
principle.
Let S(n) be the statement: Any set of natural numbers containing
a natural number nhas a least element. Consider the set
E={mN:S(m) is true}.
1Ebecause 1 is the least element of N(why?).
We next show mEimplies m0E. Now mEmeans if Xis
a subset of Ncontaining a natural number m, then Xhas a least
element. From this we want to establish m0E.
So let Cbe any subset of Ncontaining a natural number m0. If C
has no element < m0, then m0is the least element of Cand we are done.
Otherwise, we can now suppose there is a natural number yCsuch
that y < m0. In particular, ymbecause by one of the homework 3
problems we know there is no natural number strictly between mand
m0. Therefore, Cnow has an element ym, so that the induction
hypothesis given in the preceding paragraph implies that Chas a least
element. In any event, we have proven Chas a least element, so that
m0E. Hence, the mathematical induction implies E=N.
1
pf2

Partial preview of the text

Download Math 310 Class Notes 4: The Well-ordering Principle and more Lecture notes Mathematics in PDF only on Docsity!

Math 310 Class Notes 4: The Well-ordering Principle

Well-ordering principle: Every nonempty subset T of N has a least element. That is, there is an m ∈ T such that m ≤ n for all n ∈ T. Intutively clear as it may seem at the first glance, this principle turns out to be logically equivalent to the mathematical induction, the fifth axiom of Peano, which is quite surprising.

Theorem 1. The mathematical induction is logically equivalent to the well-ordering principle.

Proof. Part I. We show the well-ordering principle implies the math- ematical induction. Let S ⊂ N be such that 1 ∈ S and k ∈ S implies k′^ ∈ S. We want to establish that S = N by the well-ordering principle. Suppose N\S is not empty. Then by the well-ordering principle there is a least element m ∈ N \ S. Since 1 ∈ S we know 1 ∈/ N \ S. Therefore m 6 = 1 and so by one of the homework 2 problems there is some q ∈ N such that m = q′^ = q + 1, which implies q < m by the definition of <. We conclude that q ∈ S; or else we would have q ∈ N \ S and so m would not be the least element of N \ S, which is absurd. However, since S has the property that k ∈ S implies k′^ ∈ S, we conclude that m = q′^ ∈ S because q ∈ S. This contradicts m ∈ N \ S. The contradiction establishes that N \ S is empty. Hence S = N. Part II. We show the mathematical induction implies the well-ordering principle. Let S(n) be the statement: Any set of natural numbers containing a natural number ≤ n has a least element. Consider the set

E = {m ∈ N : S(m) is true}. 1 ∈ E because 1 is the least element of N (why?). We next show m ∈ E implies m′^ ∈ E. Now m ∈ E means if X is a subset of N containing a natural number ≤ m, then X has a least element. From this we want to establish m′^ ∈ E. So let C be any subset of N containing a natural number ≤ m′. If C has no element < m′, then m′^ is the least element of C and we are done. Otherwise, we can now suppose there is a natural number y ∈ C such that y < m′. In particular, y ≤ m because by one of the homework 3 problems we know there is no natural number strictly between m and m′. Therefore, C now has an element y ≤ m, so that the induction hypothesis given in the preceding paragraph implies that C has a least element. In any event, we have proven C has a least element, so that m′^ ∈ E. Hence, the mathematical induction implies E = N. 1

2

In summary, the mathematical induction implies that the statement S(n) is true for all n ∈ N. To establish the well-ordering principle, let T ⊂ N be a nonempty set. There is some m ∈ T because T is nonempty, so that T contains a natural number ≤ m, which is just m itself. Then T has a least element because the statement S(m) is true by the preceding paragraph.