Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $\kappa$ be a regular cardinal. I want to show that there exist $\kappa^+$ almost disjoint functions $\kappa \to \kappa$. Recall that this means for any two such functions $f,g$ we have $| \{\alpha \mid f(\alpha) = g(\alpha) \}| < \kappa$.

Apparently it is enough to show that given $\kappa$ almost disjoint functions $\{ f_\nu \mid \nu < \kappa\}$, then there exists an $f:\kappa \to \kappa$ almost disjoint from each $f_\nu$, $(\nu < \kappa)$. I can't see why this is sufficient to prove the statement though - can anybody enlighten me? Thanks very much.

share|improve this question
    
I think we can use induction to construct $\kappa^+$ functions given we have such a family $\{ f_\nu \mid \nu < \kappa \}$ but I'm not sure how to initially construct such a family. –  Paul Slevin Mar 29 '12 at 20:47
    
There’s nothing special needed initially. –  Brian M. Scott Mar 29 '12 at 20:52

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

Just construct $\{f_\xi:\xi<\kappa^+\}$ recursively. At each stage you have at most $\kappa$ functions already defined, so by your hypothesis you can add a new one that’s almost disjoint from the ones that you already have.

In other words, at stage $\eta<\kappa^+$ you have $\mathscr{F}_\eta=\{f_\xi:\xi<\eta\}$. $|\mathscr{F}_\eta|\le\kappa$, so by your hypothesis there is a function $f_\eta:\kappa\to\kappa$ that is almost disjoint from $f_\xi$ for each $\xi<\eta$. Now continue.

Added: For the sake of completeness I’m adding the construction of $f_\eta$. Since $|\mathscr{F}_\eta|\le\kappa$, we can re-index it as $\{g_\xi:\xi<\alpha\}$ for some $\alpha\le\kappa$. Now define

$$f_\eta:\kappa\to\kappa:\xi\mapsto\sup\{g_\zeta(\xi)+1:\zeta\le\xi\}\;;$$

then for each $\zeta<\alpha$ we have $f_\eta(\xi)>g_\zeta(\xi)$ whenever $\xi\ge\zeta$, and hence $f_\eta$ is almost disjoint from $g_\zeta$.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you. It says here I can use a diagonal argument to construct such functions, but I'm having trouble parsing the text. Is it possible we can define $f_{\eta}$ such that $f_{\eta}(\beta) \not= f_{\xi}(\beta)$ for all $\xi < \eta$ and $\beta > \xi$ ? –  Paul Slevin Mar 29 '12 at 21:10
1  
@Paul: My construction of $f_\eta$ in the added bit is the diagonal argument in question. –  Brian M. Scott Mar 29 '12 at 21:14
    
Oops I was being a bit dense. I think a suitable function is given any $\beta < \kappa$, we ensure that $f_\xi (\beta) \not= f_\alpha (\beta)$ whenever $\beta > \xi$. –  Paul Slevin Mar 29 '12 at 21:16
    
Ah OK, I didn't realise you had added a bit. Thanks very much. –  Paul Slevin Mar 29 '12 at 21:16
1  
@Paul: Yes: $\kappa^+$ is the smallest ordinal of cardinality greater than $\kappa$. –  Brian M. Scott Mar 29 '12 at 21:45

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.