Proof that $sigma$-algebra is not countable (proof revision)












0












$begingroup$


This problem has already several answers here
Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable

and it has been asked a lot times before.


But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
This is the problem:




Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that

(a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets

(b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable




So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
$$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.

For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.


Thanks in advance!






real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    This problem has already several answers here
    Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable

    and it has been asked a lot times before.


    But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
    This is the problem:




    Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that

    (a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets

    (b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable




    So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
    $$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
    cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
    so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.

    For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.


    Thanks in advance!






    real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification







    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      This problem has already several answers here
      Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable

      and it has been asked a lot times before.


      But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
      This is the problem:




      Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that

      (a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets

      (b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable




      So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
      $$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
      cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
      so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.

      For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.


      Thanks in advance!






      real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification







      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      This problem has already several answers here
      Prove that an infinite sigma algebra contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets and is uncountable

      and it has been asked a lot times before.


      But I'd like a revision of my proof. Given the complexity of the solutions I've seen I believe my proof is wrong, but I cannot determine what is my mistake.
      This is the problem:




      Let $mathcal{M}$ be an infinite $sigma$ algebra on a nonempty set $X$. Show that

      (a) $mathcal{M}$ contains an infinite sequence of disjoint sets

      (b) $mathcal{M}$ is not countable




      So for $(a)$, let ${E_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ be a sequence of elements in $mathcal{M}$. Define $F_i$ as
      $$F_k = E_kbackslash left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right) = E_k
      cap left( bigcup_{i=1}^{k-1} E_i right)^c$$
      so clearly ${F_j}_{j=1}^infty subseteq mathcal{M}$ and they are disjoint.

      For $(b)$, suppose there exists and injection $f$ from $mathcal{M}$ to $omega$. Then $bar{f}= frestriction_{ {F_i}_{i=1}^infty}$ is inyective and $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. But for any $k$ we have $F_k^c in mathcal{M}$ and $F_k^c notin {F_i}_{i=1}^infty$ (because $X = F_k cup F_k^c$ and the $F_i$ are disjoint). So $bar{f}(F_k^c) notin omega$ (since $bar{f}$ is an injection), but this contradicts $Im(bar{f}) = omega$.


      Thanks in advance!






      real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification




      real-analysis measure-theory proof-verification






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 18 '18 at 7:37









      Did

      248k23224463




      248k23224463










      asked Dec 18 '18 at 6:37









      mate89mate89

      1819




      1819






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
          You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.



          The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 4:23












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:11










          • $begingroup$
            Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:22












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:42











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3044851%2fproof-that-sigma-algebra-is-not-countable-proof-revision%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1












          $begingroup$

          There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
          You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.



          The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 4:23












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:11










          • $begingroup$
            Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:22












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
















          1












          $begingroup$

          There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
          You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.



          The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 4:23












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:11










          • $begingroup$
            Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:22












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:42














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
          You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.



          The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          There is no guarantee that the $F_k$ will not be empty from some $k$ onwards.
          You will need to do more work to ensure we get non-empty sets.



          The proof of uncountability you gave makes no sense. Why is the image of $bar{f}$ equal to $omega$? You just claim that.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 18 '18 at 7:04









          Henno BrandsmaHenno Brandsma

          111k348118




          111k348118












          • $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 4:23












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:11










          • $begingroup$
            Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:22












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:42


















          • $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 4:23












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:11










          • $begingroup$
            Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
            $endgroup$
            – mate89
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:22












          • $begingroup$
            @mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
            $endgroup$
            – Henno Brandsma
            Dec 19 '18 at 5:42
















          $begingroup$
          Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
          $endgroup$
          – mate89
          Dec 19 '18 at 4:23






          $begingroup$
          Thanks a lot for your answer. Since $f$ is an injection and I assumed the $F_i$ are all distinct, I thought the restriction of $f$ to $F_i$ would be a bijection to $omega$ (for any $k in omega$ there is a corresponding $F_k$), thus $Im(bar{f}) = omega$. Sadly, I can't see why is that wrong. Would you explain me please? thanks!
          $endgroup$
          – mate89
          Dec 19 '18 at 4:23














          $begingroup$
          @mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
          $endgroup$
          – Henno Brandsma
          Dec 19 '18 at 5:11




          $begingroup$
          @mate89 the image can be any infinite subset of $omega$
          $endgroup$
          – Henno Brandsma
          Dec 19 '18 at 5:11












          $begingroup$
          Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
          $endgroup$
          – mate89
          Dec 19 '18 at 5:22






          $begingroup$
          Hmmm I see. One last question: if I have a sequence ${x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ where they are all disctinct ($x_i ne x_j$ for $j ne i$), and we set $A := {x_i}_{i=0}^infty$ can we say something about $card(A)$? is it possible to define an injection such that we can show that $card(A) = aleph_0$. Thanks again!
          $endgroup$
          – mate89
          Dec 19 '18 at 5:22














          $begingroup$
          @mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
          $endgroup$
          – Henno Brandsma
          Dec 19 '18 at 5:42




          $begingroup$
          @mate89 by definition $i to x_i$ is an injection so $A$ is trivially countably infinite.
          $endgroup$
          – Henno Brandsma
          Dec 19 '18 at 5:42


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3044851%2fproof-that-sigma-algebra-is-not-countable-proof-revision%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

          Image
          0 0 $begingroup$ Need help with this problem. Suppose our lazy professor collects a quiz and a homework assignment from a class of n students one day, then distributes both the quizzes and the homework assignments back to the class in a random fashion for grading. Each student receives one quiz and one homework assignment to grade. (a) What is the probability that every student receives someone else's quiz to grade, and someone else's homework to grade? (b) What is the probability that no student receives both their own quiz and their own homework assignment to grade? In this case, some students may receive their own quiz, and others may receive their own homework assignment. (c) Compute the limiting probability as n approaches infinity in each case. ...
          Read more

          Aardman Animations

          Image
          Aardman Animations, Ltd. Aardman Animations Tipo privada Atividade Animação em stop-motion , Animação em CGI Fundação 1972 Fundador(es) Peter Lord David Sproxton Sede Bristol, Inglaterra  Reino Unido Proprietário(s) Dreamworks Pessoas-chave Peter Lord David Sproxton Nick Park Divisões Aardman Features Aardman Digital Aardman Commercials Aardman Broadcast Aardman International Aardman Rights Aardman Effects Aardman 3-D Systems Aardman Nathan Love AardBoiled Website oficial aardman.com ...
          Read more

          Are they similar matrix

          Image
          0 $begingroup$ Do $begin{bmatrix} 0&i&0\0&0&1\0&0&0 end{bmatrix} $ and $begin{bmatrix} 0&0&0\-i&0&0\0&1&0 end{bmatrix} $ are similar.Is this True/false Clearly both are nilpotent and one is conjucate transpose of other but how to know if they are similar.i'm stuck. Please help me linear-algebra vector-spaces eigenvalues-eigenvectors generalizedeigenvector share | cite | improve this question edited Dec 10 '18 at 6:38 Vasanth Kris asked Dec 10 '18 at 6:19 ...
          Read more