8
$\begingroup$

What I mean by the title is whether, given that there is a class $\Bbb R$ and operations $+,\cdot,<$ that satisfy the ordered field axioms and the least upper bound axiom, you can prove the existence of an infinite set in $\sf ZF-Inf$. My intuition says this is possible, because those axioms are sufficient to prove that $|\Bbb R|=|2^\Bbb N|$ in $\sf ZF$, and most (all?) models that satisfy the negation of infinity are countable, which means that classes like this $\Bbb R$ cannot possibly fit in the model. (Note that I am not assuming that $\Bbb R\in V$, which would make the question trivial.)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This may seem like an unintelligent comment, but how does one prove an axiom? $\endgroup$ – user122283 May 3 '14 at 0:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Derive that the axiom is true as a theorem without using it in the proof. $\endgroup$ – Mario Carneiro May 3 '14 at 0:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If a first-order theory over a countable language has an infinite model, or even arbitrarily large finite models, then for any infinite cardinal $\kappa$ it has a model of cardinality $\kappa$. $\endgroup$ – André Nicolas May 3 '14 at 0:17
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The assertion that the Axiom of Infinity follows seems highly plausible, and interesting. $\endgroup$ – André Nicolas May 3 '14 at 0:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Hurkyl I was trying to put this in words, but I agree with you - the cardinality argument breaks down not only because of Andre's point, but also because without infinity you might even have $\Bbb R$ countable. I'm interested in both sides of this question - if it's true, I get a proof that the real numbers imply infinity, and if it's false, I get a construction of the real numbers that doesn't need infinity. $\endgroup$ – Mario Carneiro May 3 '14 at 1:59
6
$\begingroup$

The question is a bit tricky to formalize. If we work in $\mathsf{ZF}-\text{Infinity} + \neg \text{Infinity}$ then any ordered field is necessarily a proper class, so the least upper bound property is really an axiom schema and not a single axiom. However, I think that in any reasonable formulation the answer to the question is "yes".

Work in $\mathsf{ZF}-\text{Infinity}$. If $\omega$ is a set then we're done, so assume that $\omega$ is a proper class (in which case it is the class of all ordinals.) Then there is a definable surjection $\omega \to V$.

Assume that $\mathcal{R} = (R,+^\mathcal{R},\times^\mathcal{R},<^\mathcal{R})$ is an ordered field. We can either formalize what we are proving as a theorem schema with one theorem for every possible quadruple of formulas defining an ordered field, or we can formalize it as a theorem in the language of set theory expanded by predicate symbols $R$, $+$, $\times$, and $<$. In any case, we will show that $\mathcal{R}$ is not complete.

Recall that $V$ is countable, so in particular $R$ is countable. Let $f : \omega \to R$ be a surjection. We may then use Cantor's proof of the uncountability of the reals to define a $<^\mathcal{R}$-bounded subclass of $R$ with no least upper bound (if $\mathcal{R}$ were complete, we would get an element of $R$ not in the range of $f$, but every element of $R$ is in the range of $f$, so instead the argument tells us that $\mathcal{R}$ is not complete.)

More details: we recursively define a strictly $<^\mathcal{R}$-increasing sequence $(a_n : n<\omega)$ and a strictly $<^\mathcal{R}$-decreasing sequence $(b_n : n<\omega)$ such that for every $n < \omega$ we have $a_n <^\mathcal{R} b_n$ and either $f(n) <^\mathcal{R} a_n$ or $b_n <^\mathcal{R} f(n)$. (We don't need the Axiom of Choice to choose $a_n$ and $b_n$ because the universe is definably well-ordered in order type $\omega$ via $f$.) Then the set $\{x \in R : \exists n \in \omega\,(x <^\mathcal{R} a_n)\}$ is a bounded subset of $\mathcal{R}$ with no least upper bound.


EDIT: In summary, your intuition is essentially correct. However, we need more than the fact that "most" models (e.g. the intended model $V_\omega$) of $\mathsf{ZF} - \text{Infinity} + \neg\text{Infinity}$ are seen to be countable from the outside. We need to use the fact that the theory $\mathsf{ZF} - \text{Infinity} + \neg\text{Infinity}$ proves "$V$ is countable," which allows us, working in this theory, to use Cantor's argument to rule out the existence of a complete ordered field of the same size as $V$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Regarding the second paragraph: If $\omega$ is a set then we're already done. $\endgroup$ – Mario Carneiro May 3 '14 at 4:56
  • $\begingroup$ @MarioCarneiro Oh, right. Perhaps I should add that we can actually prove that there is an uncountable set. $\endgroup$ – Trevor Wilson May 3 '14 at 5:03
  • $\begingroup$ @MarioCarneiro Never mind; there was no point to that observation. $\endgroup$ – Trevor Wilson May 3 '14 at 5:12
  • $\begingroup$ Ah! Damn cold... $\endgroup$ – Andrés E. Caicedo May 3 '14 at 5:44
  • $\begingroup$ @Andres I hope you get well soon $\endgroup$ – Trevor Wilson May 3 '14 at 5:44

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.