Topic 9 of 10

Degrees of Infinity

🎯 Learning Objectives

10.1 The Question

🤔 Are some infinities larger than others?

  • Is |ℕ| < |ℤ|? (Are there more integers than natural numbers?)
  • Is |ℤ| < |ℚ|? (Are there more rationals than integers?)
  • Is |ℚ| < |ℝ|? (Are there more reals than rationals?)

👨‍🔬 Studied by: Georg Cantor (1870s)

Georg Cantor revolutionized mathematics by showing that not all infinities are equal. His work initially faced strong opposition but is now fundamental to mathematics.

🔧 Tool: Use bijections to compare infinite sets

Two sets have the same cardinality if and only if there exists a bijection between them.

10.2 Countable Sets

🔑 Definition: Countable Set

A set X is countable if there exists a bijection f: ℕ → X

Interpretation:

  • Can enumerate X as {f(0), f(1), f(2), ...}
  • X can be "counted" via f
  • X has same cardinality as ℕ

ℕ is Countable (by definition)

Identity function works: f(n) = n

This gives us our baseline for comparison.

10.3 Are Integers Countable?

🤯 Intuition vs Reality

Intuition: ℤ seems twice as large as ℕ (has negative numbers too)

Surprising Result: ℤ is countable!

📊 Bijection Strategy

Interleave positive and negative integers. Map ℕ → ℤ as follows:


0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ...

0, 1, -1, 2, -2, 3, -3, ...

Explicit Formula:

f(0) = 0
f(i) = (i+1)/2 if i is odd
f(i) = -(i/2) if i is even (and i > 0)
Conclusion: |ℕ| = |ℤ|

10.4 Are Rationals Countable?

🌊 Initial Intuition

ℚ is dense, ℤ is discrete → ℚ might be larger

But this intuition is wrong!

🔗 Key Observation

There's an obvious bijection ℤ × ℤ ↔ ℚ

  • Every rational p/q corresponds to pair (p, q)
  • So |ℚ| = |ℤ × ℤ|

📐 Strategy: Show ℕ × ℕ is countable

Use diagonal enumeration of ℕ × ℕ:

Diagonal Enumeration Pattern:

(0,0) → 0
(1,0), (0,1) → 1, 2
(2,0), (1,1), (0,2) → 3, 4, 5
(3,0), (2,1), (1,2), (0,3) → 6, 7, 8, 9
(4,0), (3,1), (2,2), (1,3), (0,4) → 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
...

This systematic enumeration shows we can count all pairs!

Result: ℚ is countable!
Surprising Conclusion: |ℕ| = |ℤ| = |ℚ|
Despite density, rationals have same cardinality as integers!

10.5 Are Real Numbers Countable?

💥 Revolutionary Claim

ℝ is NOT countable

This was Cantor's most shocking discovery!

🔍 Cantor's Diagonalization Proof

Step 1: Representation

Represent real numbers in [0,1) as infinite binary sequences

  • Each real number ↔ infinite sequence of 0s and 1s
  • Example: 0.101001... represents a specific real

Step 2: Assume Countability

Assume (for contradiction) all such sequences can be enumerated:

s₁ = 0.101001...
s₂ = 0.011100...
s₃ = 0.100101...
s₄ = 0.110101...
s₅ = 0.010101...
...

Step 3: Construct Diagonal

Create new sequence d = d₁d₂d₃d₄d₅... where:

  • d₁ ≠ b₁ (differs from s₁ in position 1)
  • d₂ ≠ b₂ (differs from s₂ in position 2)
  • d₃ ≠ b₃ (differs from s₃ in position 3)
  • ...
  • d differs from EVERY sequence in the list!

Step 4: Contradiction

  • d is a valid sequence, but not in our "complete" enumeration
  • Therefore, no such enumeration exists
  • ℝ is uncountable!

10.6 Implications

📊 Cardinality Hierarchy

Countable Infinities:
|ℕ| = |ℤ| = |ℚ| (all countable)
Uncountable Infinities:
|ℝ| > |ℚ| (reals are uncountable)

🌟 About Irrational Numbers

  • ℚ is countable
  • ℝ = ℚ ∪ {irrationals}
  • ℝ is uncountable
  • Therefore: Irrational numbers are uncountable
  • There are VASTLY more irrational numbers than rational numbers!

🔍 Even Tiny Intervals

  • Even the tiny interval (0, 1) is uncountable
  • Any non-trivial interval of reals is uncountable
  • This shows how "dense" the irrationals really are

10.7 Continuum Hypothesis

❓ The Ultimate Question

Question: Is there a set whose cardinality is strictly between |ℕ| and |ℝ|?

🏛️ Historical Importance:

  • Posed by Cantor in late 1800s
  • One of the most important open questions in set theory
  • Listed as Hilbert's First Problem (1900)

🎯 Resolution by Paul Cohen (1960s):

Proved the Continuum Hypothesis is independent of set theory axioms

  • Cannot be proven true or false from standard axioms
  • One of the most profound results in mathematical logic
  • Shows the limitations of axiomatic systems

🧮 Practice Problems

Problem 1: Bijection Construction

Show that the set of even natural numbers {0, 2, 4, 6, 8, ...} is countable by constructing an explicit bijection with ℕ.

Solution:

Bijection f: ℕ → {even naturals}

f(n) = 2n

  • f(0) = 0
  • f(1) = 2
  • f(2) = 4
  • f(3) = 6
  • ...

This is clearly injective (different inputs give different outputs) and surjective (every even natural is 2n for some n). Therefore, the even naturals are countable.

Problem 2: Understanding Cardinalities

Explain why |ℕ × ℕ| = |ℕ| even though ℕ × ℕ seems "two-dimensional".

Solution:

The diagonal enumeration shows we can systematically count all pairs:

  1. Organize by sum: Group pairs (a,b) by their sum a+b
  2. Within each group, enumerate systematically
  3. This creates a bijection ℕ → ℕ × ℕ

Key insight: Even though ℕ × ℕ appears "bigger" (two-dimensional), we can still count all pairs in a systematic way. Cardinality depends on the existence of a bijection, not on intuitive "size."

Problem 3: Diagonalization Understanding

In Cantor's diagonalization proof, why can't the diagonal sequence d be in our original enumeration?

Solution:

By construction, d cannot be anywhere in the list:

  • d ≠ s₁ because they differ in position 1
  • d ≠ s₂ because they differ in position 2
  • d ≠ s₃ because they differ in position 3
  • Generally: d ≠ sₙ because they differ in position n

This is the genius of the proof: We construct d specifically to differ from every sequence in our supposed "complete" enumeration, showing that no such complete enumeration can exist.

Problem 4: Cardinality Hierarchy

Arrange the following sets in order of increasing cardinality: ℝ, ℚ, ℤ, ℕ, {irrational numbers}.

Solution:

Two groups by cardinality:

Countable (all equal cardinality):

  • ℕ, ℤ, ℚ all have the same cardinality
  • |ℕ| = |ℤ| = |ℚ|

Uncountable (larger cardinality):

  • ℝ and {irrational numbers} are both uncountable
  • |ℝ| = |{irrational numbers}| > |ℚ|

Final order: ℕ = ℤ = ℚ < ℝ = {irrational numbers}