디멘의 블로그 Dimen's Blog
이데아를 여행하는 히치하이커
Alice in Logicland

EN

Transfinite Induction and Transfinite Recursion

Mathematics
Set Theory

1. Transfinite Induction

Theorem. Let $P$ be a property defined on ordinals, and suppose that for any $\alpha \in \mathrm{Ord}$,

\[[ \forall \beta < \alpha : P(\beta)] → P(\alpha).\]

Then $P$ is true for all ordinals.

Remark. Since $\mathrm{Ord}$, the domain of $P$, is a proper class rather than a set, we use the term “property” instead of “predicate”.

Proof. Suppose there exists $\lambda$ such that $\lnot P(\lambda)$. Then $\Omega = \lbrace \alpha \in \lambda : \lnot P(\alpha) \rbrace$ is a non-empty well-ordered set, so it has a minimal element $\alpha_0$. Since $\forall \beta < \alpha_0 : P(\beta)$, by hypothesis we have $P(\alpha_0)$, which is a contradiction. ■

Application. Show that the von Neumann hierarchy may be defined as $V_{\alpha + 1} = \mathcal{P}(V_\alpha)$ instead of $V_{\alpha + 1} = V_\alpha \cup \mathcal{P}(V_\alpha)$.

2. Transfinite Recursive Definition

Motivation. Consider recursive definitions on natural numbers. Given $n$ sets $x_1, \dots , x_n$ and a function $g$ that outputs a set, we would like to define $f: \mathbb{N} → V$ as follows:

\[f(n) = g(f(0), \dots, f(n - 1))\]

The problem is that $g$ can only take a fixed number of parameters. Therefore, we group the parameters of $g$ into an ordered pair:

\[f(n) = g(\langle f(0), \dots, f(n - 1) \rangle)\]

This ordered pair can be represented as $\lbrace (0, f(0)), \dots, (n - 1, f(n - 1)) \rbrace = f \upharpoonright n$. That is,

\[f(n) = g(f \upharpoonright n).\]

Generalising this to ordinals, we obtain the following:

Theorem. Let $G: V → V$ be a class function. There exists a class function $F: \mathrm{Ord} → V$ satisfying

\[F(\alpha) = G(F \upharpoonright \alpha)\]

Proof. Apply transfinite induction extensively. (Sorry for the brevity, lol.) It is worth remarking that the proof does not depend on the axiom of choice, for the well-orderedness of ordinals is provable from ZF. Note, however, that the proof that every well-ordered set is order isomorophic to an ordinal does require AC.