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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I just read the proof of how to construct two Bernstein sets in a Polish space $X$ using the facts that there are at most $2^{\aleph_0}$ many closed subsets if $X$ is Polish and that every closed subset of a Polish space is either countable or of cardinality $2^{\aleph_0}$. Now I am asked to use the theorem of generalised recursive construction to achieve the same (this is p 176 in Just/Weese).

So I thought I could define a function $G^\ast$ such that it maps the pair $\langle f,\xi \rangle$ in $P(X \times X)$ to $(X \setminus \left \{f(\gamma)[0] \mid \gamma \in \xi \right \}) \times (X \setminus \left \{f(\gamma)[1] \mid \gamma \in \xi \right \})$. Here $f: \xi \to X \times X$ and I used $[0]$ and $[1]$ to denote the first and second coordinate of an element in the image of $f$.

Can you tell me if this is correct? Thank you for your help.

share|cite|improve this question

The way I see it, there are at least a couple of problems with your function $G^*$:

  1. if $\langle x , y \rangle \in G^* ( \langle f , \xi \rangle )$, you do not ensure that $x , y \in K_\xi$;
  2. if $\langle x , y \rangle \in G^* ( \langle f , \xi \rangle )$, you do not ensure that $x \neq y$;
  3. it is not enough to ensure that if $\langle x , y \rangle \in G^* ( \langle f , \xi \rangle )$ then $x \neq f(\gamma)[0]$ for all $\gamma < \xi$ (you also need it to be different from all $f(\gamma)[1]$); similarly for $y$.

I think that if you fill in these gaps your construction will be correct.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.