The above fact makes an important connection between functions and counting. If is a finite set, is a corresponding bijection, and we create sequence with as above, then we are able to list the elements of in sequence:
.
In turn, writing the elements of in sequence is really just a way of counting them, in a manner that is roughly equivalent to counting on your fingers (if you had a lot of fingers). In fact, counting the elements of totally orders the elements of (a concept we will meet in a future chapter). In Chapter 13, we will adapt this connection between functions and counting to determine whether it is possible to βcountβ infinite sets.
We should note, however, that the above fact is essentially trivial once we βunravelβ the definitions of finite set and finite sequence, as both involve a function with domain for some and codomain .
If we have a sequence that contains each element of at least once, we could turn it into a sequence that contains each element of exactly once by removing repeated terms.
We can solve this using recursion! In Example 11.2.4, we defined the following sequence of subsets of ,
,
recursively. We can also express the sequence recursively. First, . Then, since
we can consider . (See Exercise 9.9.13.) In doing so, we can break into the disjoint union
Notice that the elements of are precisely those subsets of that do not contain the element , and therefore the elements of are precisely those subsets of that do contain the element . So
.
This correspondence actually gives us a bijection
(Check!)
Now we have
.
Since
,
we then have
,
a recursively defined sequence. Solving this recurrence relation by iteration yields
Since has the same cardinality as the set , there exists a bijection between the two sets. In Exercise 12.6.8, you are asked to prove that two sets of the same cardinality also have power sets of the same cardinality. Using this fact and the result of Worked Example 12.2.7, we have
To demonstrate that a set is infinite using the technical definition, we must demonstrate that no bijection can exist, for every cardinality value . But if is infinite, there will be many injective functions for each . Therefore, one must demonstrate that no surjection can exist, for every .
To verify this, we will argue that no function can be surjective, no matter the cardinality value . So suppose is fixed but arbitrary, and is an arbitrary function. Following the Test for Surjectivity (which also describes how to demonstrate that a function is not surjective), we must exhibit an example element in that is not the image under of any domain element in .
(Note that this is not multiplication, we are just writing the words one after the other to create one big word.) Then this word is certainly longer than any of the individual words , and so cannot be equal to one of those words. (The reason we have concatenated all the twice over is so that we donβt have to separately consider the case that all but one of the is empty, since in that case concatenating all the just once over wouldnβt actually produce a result that is longer than that one non-empty .) Since this long word is not in the sequence of image elements for , the function cannot be surjective.
While we have no hope of demonstrating that a set is infinite by demonstrating that functions cannot be injective, if we wish we can argue using injectivity by just turning things around. If a bijection were possible, its inverse would also be a bijection. So another way to demonstrate that a set is infinite is to demonstrate that no injection is possible, for every cardinality number .
If , then there exists some . Consider the restricted alphabet . In Example 12.2.10, we demonstrated that was infinite. Clearly implies , so applying Statement 1 of Fact 12.2.12 we may conclude that is also infinite.