2
$\begingroup$

Question. Does there exist a name for the the class (or a subclass) of free ultrafilters $\mathscr{F}$ on $\omega$ with the following property?

Property: There exists a partition $\{A_n: n \in \omega\}$ of $\omega$ into consecutive finite intervals such that $\max A_n/\min A_n\to \infty$ and, if $\{I_k: k \in \omega\}$ is a family of disjoint finite intervals with $I:=\bigcup_k I_k \in \mathscr{F}$ and each $I_k$ contains at least one $A_n$, then also $\bigcup_{n: A_n\subseteq I} A_n \in \mathscr{F}$.

Ps. As proved by bof below, no such ultrafilters exist. Hence I remove the tag "reference-request".

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Doesnt this trivially hold for all ultrafilters with $A_n=\{n\}$? $\endgroup$ – Andreas Lietz Jul 25 at 3:02
  • $\begingroup$ Why aren't you asking "are there any ultrafilters with this property" instead of "is there a name for ultrafilters with this property"? $\endgroup$ – bof Jul 25 at 7:47
  • $\begingroup$ The above property is a sufficient to imply that $\{a\in \{0,1\}^\omega: \mathscr{F}-\lim \mu_n(a)=0\}$ is not analytic, where $(\mu_n)$ is a sequence of "well-behaved" lower semicontinuous submeasures. I could prove that at least one $\mathscr{F}_0$ of this type exists. However, I was not able to show that $\mathscr{F}_0$ satisfies the above property. And your answer explains why, good job. $\endgroup$ – Paolo Leonetti Jul 25 at 8:07
2
$\begingroup$

I'll try to prove that no such ultrafilter can exist. Assume for a contradiction that the ultrafilter $\mathscr F$ and the partition $\{A_n:n\in\omega\}$ have the stated properties.

Choose $N$ so that $\#A_n\ge2$ for all $n\ge N$. For each $n\ge N$ choose nonempty intervals $B_n$ and $C_n$ so that $A_n=B_n\cup C_n$ and $\max B_n\lt\min C_n$.

One of the sets $A_{N+1}\cup A_{N+3}\cup A_{N+5}\cup A_{N+7}\cup\cdots$ and $A_{N+2}\cup A_{N+4}\cup A_{N+6}\cup A_{N+8}\cup\cdots$ belongs to $\mathscr F$; without loss of generality we may assume that $$A_{N+1}\cup A_{N+3}\cup A_{N+5}\cup A_{N+7}\cup\cdots\in\mathscr F.$$ Now one of the following cases holds:


Case 1. $B_{N+1}\cup B_{N+3}\cup B_{N+5}\cup B_{N+7}\cup\cdots\in\mathscr F$.

Let $I_1=A_N\cup B_{N+1}$, $I_2=A_{N+2}\cup B_{N+3}$, $I_3=A_{N+4}\cup B_{N+5}$, $I_4=A_{N+6}\cup B_{N+7}$, etc. Now

$I=I_1\cup I_2\cup I_3\cup I_4\cup\cdots\supseteq B_{N+1}\cup B_{N+3}\cup B_{N+5}\cup B_{N+7}\cup\cdots\in\mathscr F$, while
$$\bigcup_{n:A_n\subseteq I}A_n=A_N\cup A_{N+2}\cup A_{N+4}\cup A_{N+6}\cup\cdots\notin\mathscr F.$$


Case 2. $C_{N+1}\cup C_{N+3}\cup C_{N+5}\cup C_{N+7}\cup\cdots\in\mathscr F$.

Let $I_1=C_{N+1}\cup A_{N+2}$, $I_2=C_{N+3}\cup A_{N+4}$, $I_3=C_{N+5}\cup A_{N+6}$, $I_4=C_{N+7}\cup A_{N+8}$, etc. Now

$I=I_1\cup I_2\cup I_3\cup I_4\cup\cdots\supseteq C_{N+1}\cup C_{N+3}\cup C_{N+5}\cup C_{N+7}\cup\cdots\in\mathscr F$, while $$\bigcup_{n:A_n\subseteq I}A_n=A_{N+2}\cup A_{N+4}\cup A_{N+6}\cup A_{N+8}\cup\cdots\notin\mathscr F.$$

$\endgroup$

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.