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.

Can someone please enlighten me if or how both of these facts can be true? I entered $\aleph_0-\aleph_0$ into WolframAlpha, which gave the result as undefined. But it also plotted the result on a number line at zero. Similarly, $\frac{\aleph_0}{\aleph_0}$ is 1 on the number line, but undefined. Is this just a bug?

share|improve this question
1  
I'd say that "bug" is the the best interpretation. –  Mark McClure May 30 '13 at 6:30

3 Answers 3

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Cardinal addition and multiplication (at least for $\aleph$ numbers, which in $\sf ZFC$ means all cardinal arithmetics) has the following property:$$\aleph_\alpha+\aleph_\beta=\aleph_\alpha\cdot\aleph_\beta=\max\{\aleph_\alpha,\aleph_\beta\}=\aleph_{\max\{\alpha,\beta\}}.$$

When an operation can be reversed we usually expect the answer to be uniquely determined. But $\aleph_0+\aleph_0=\aleph_0\cdot\aleph_0=\aleph_0$, and so if we could cancel either of the operations we would get: $$\begin{align} &\aleph_0+0=\aleph_0\\&\aleph_0+\aleph_0=\aleph_0\\&\aleph_0+\diagup\hspace{-.7em}\aleph_0=\diagup\hspace{-.7em}\aleph_0& \implies\aleph_0=0.\end{align}$$

Or similarly, for multiplication:

$$\begin{align}&\aleph_0\cdot1=\aleph_0\\&\aleph_0\cdot\aleph_0=\aleph_0\\&\aleph_0\cdot\diagup\hspace{-.7em}\aleph_0=\diagup\hspace{-.7em}\aleph_0&\implies\aleph_0=1.\end{align}$$

Either result is absurd, of course.

share|improve this answer
    
I've edited it; I hope this is what you were trying to do. Strange MathJax. –  Lord_Farin May 30 '13 at 10:35

You ought to consider what the aleph numbers really mean: $\aleph_0$ is the cardinality of the naturals, and is, loosely speaking, a "type of infinity". Normal arithmetic operations are not defined for these numbers because it doesn't make any sense to use them; WA is probably just using a rule (x-x=0, x/x=1) that doesn't apply in this case.

To see what I mean, consider the set of naturals $\mathbb{N}$. It has cardinality $\aleph_0$. Now consider the set of even numbers $\mathbb{2N}$: it also has cardinality $\aleph_0$. If you take $\mathbb{N}$ and exclude (subtract) all even numbers, you get another set, the set of odds, which also has cardinality $\aleph_0$. So $\aleph_0-\aleph_0=\aleph_0$! Obviously this is silly, but you could construct a case where this subtraction gave you any number.

share|improve this answer

Ignore the number line. That was there just in case "aleph-0" was supposed to represent a real number.

Cardinal subtraction and division are problematic to define, for many reasons, some of which are included here, others here.

share|improve this answer

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.