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.

I'm going to assume GCH here. If that holds, then why do we have the equalities $2^{\lt\kappa}=\kappa$ for every $\kappa$, and $\kappa^{\lt\kappa}=\kappa$ for all regular $\kappa$?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Recall the definition of $\lambda^{<\mu} = \sup\{\lambda^\nu\mid\nu<\mu\}$.

Assume GCH, let $\kappa$ be a regular cardinal.

$$2^{<\kappa} = \sup\{2^\lambda \mid \lambda<\kappa\} = \sup\{\lambda^+\mid\lambda<\kappa\} = \kappa$$

Where the last equality holds since if $\kappa$ is a successor cardinal then it is $\lambda^+$ for some $\lambda<\kappa$; and if it is a regular limit cardinal then it is the limit of successor cardinals below it.

$$\kappa^{<\kappa} = \sup\{\kappa^\lambda\mid\lambda<\kappa\} = \kappa$$

The last equality follows from: $$\begin{align} \kappa^\lambda &=\kappa\cdot\sup\{\mu^\lambda\mid\mu<\kappa\}\\ &\le\kappa\cdot\sup\{\max\{2^\mu,2^\lambda\}\mid\mu<\kappa\}\\ &=\kappa\cdot\sup\{\max\{\mu^+,\lambda^+\}\mid\mu<\kappa\}\\ &=\kappa\cdot\kappa=\kappa \end{align}$$

share|improve this answer
Thanks again, Asaf. –  rankled Dec 13 '11 at 13:23
@rankled: No problems :-) –  Asaf Karagila Dec 13 '11 at 22:22
Why do we assume $\nu$ is regular in the definition of $\lambda^{<\mu}$? Especially given that we make no such assumption in the definition of $2^{<\kappa}.$ –  goblin May 8 at 13:53
@user18921: Yeah, it's not clear to me why I wrote this, and where this is used throughout the post. I'll think about it for a bit, since I don't want to bump a two and a half year old post for no reason. –  Asaf Karagila May 8 at 14:08
Okay well I'll be interested to hear your thoughts. Pretty sure the definitions do not agree, e.g. consider $\lambda =2$ and $\kappa=\mu = \aleph_{\omega+1}$. Then under GCH, the $\lambda^{<\mu} = \aleph_\omega$, but $2^{<\kappa}$ is $\aleph_{\omega+1}$. –  goblin May 8 at 14:18

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.