5
$\begingroup$

Can anybody point me towards a model of set theory where not every set can be linearly ordered, and a corresponding proof. I have seen it claimed that in Fraenkels second permutation model that there is a set that cannot be linearly ordered, but cannot find a proof.

Essentially, I am asking for a proof that without choice sometimes the linear ordering principle fails.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In the case of the Fraenkel model, would this just come down to saying that any linear ordering would have a finite support, and then we just consider a permutation of two atoms outside of said support? $\endgroup$ – LGar Apr 15 at 19:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, by the way, a direct argument in both the models of Fraenkel is that any linear order would have a finite support and we can find a permutation that moves some things in an incongruous way. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Apr 15 at 21:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Possible duplicate of Proving "every set can be totally ordered" without using Axiom of Choice $\endgroup$ – YuiTo Cheng Apr 15 at 23:04
  • $\begingroup$ This question is not as far as I can tell a duplicate - that question is asking for a proof of the linear ordering principle without choice, while I was asking for a proof that the linear ordering principle can sometimes fail in the abscence of choice. $\endgroup$ – LGar Apr 16 at 0:21
  • $\begingroup$ What about Is every set linearly ordered in ZF $\endgroup$ – YuiTo Cheng Apr 16 at 0:57
9
$\begingroup$

Yes, both of Fraenkel's models are examples of such models. To see why note that:

  1. In the first model, the atoms are an amorphous set. Namely, there cannot be split into two infinite sets. An amorphous set cannot be linearly ordered. To see why, note that $\{a\in A\mid a\text{ defines a finite initial segment}\}$ is either finite or co-finite. Assume it's co-finite, otherwise take the reverse order, then by removing finitely many elements we have a linear ordering where every proper initial segment is finite. This defines a bijection with $\omega$, of course. So the set can be split into two infinite sets after all.

  2. In the second model, the atoms can be written as a countable union of pairs which do not have a choice function. If the atoms were linearly orderable in that model, then we could have defined a choice function from the pairs: take the smallest one.

For models of $\sf ZF$ one can imitate Fraenkel's construction using sets-of-sets-of Cohen reals as your atoms. This can be found in Jech's "Axiom of Choice" book in Chapter 5, as Cohen's second model.

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

An interesting example of a different kind is any model where all sets of reals have the Baire property. In any such set the quotient of $\mathbb R$ by the Vitali equivalence relation is not linearly orderable. See here for a sketch.

Examples of such models are Solovay's model where all sets of reals are Lebesgue measurable, or natural models of the axiom of determinacy, or Shelah's model from section 7 of

MR0768264 (86g:03082a). Shelah, Saharon. Can you take Solovay's inaccessible away? Israel J. Math. 48 (1984), no. 1, 1–47.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Good examples, albeit significantly more complicated! :-) $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Apr 15 at 21:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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