Prove Zorn's Lemma is equivalent to the following statement

In summary, Zorn's Lemma is equivalent to the statement that for all (A,≤), the set of all chains of (A,≤) has an ⊆-maximal element. This can be proven by showing that if Zorn's Lemma holds, then the set of chains of (A,≤) has an ⊆-maximal element, and if the set of chains of (A,≤) has an ⊆-maximal element, then Zorn's Lemma holds.
  • #1
VrhoZna
14
3

Homework Statement


From Introduction to Set Theory Chapter 8.1 exercise 1.4

Prove that Zorn's Lemma is equivalent to the following statement:
For all ##(A,\leq)##, the set of all chains of ##(A,\leq)## has an ##\subseteq##-maximal element.[/B]

Homework Equations


N/A

The Attempt at a Solution


(##\Rightarrow##): Suppose Zorn's Lemma holds and let ##(A,\leq)## be a partially ordered set and let C be its set of chains. It's clear that each element of C is bounded above (##X \subseteq A## for each ##X \in C##) and thus has C has a ##\subseteq##-maximal element by Zorn's Lemma.

(##\Leftarrow##): Suppose, for all ##(A,\leq)##, the set of all chains of ##(A,\leq)## has an ##\subseteq##-maximal element. Let (##P, \leq##) be a partially ordered set, C the set of chains of P, X a maximal element of C, and suppose that every chain of P is bounded above; we show that P has a ##\leq##-maximal element. Since X is bounded above there exists a ##c \in P## such that ##x \leq c## for all ##x \in X##. Now let ##y \in \bigcup C = P## (as the singleton subsets of P are trivially chains of P) such that ##y \not\in X## (if no such y exists then X = P and c is the greatest element of P and hence a ##\leq##-maximal element). Then, if ##c \leq y##, we have ##x \leq y## for all ##x \in X## and thus ##X = X \cup \{y\}## as ##X \cup \{y\}## is a chain of P and X is a ##\subseteq##-maximal element of C, contradicting our choice of y. Hence ##y \leq c## for all ##y \in A## so c is the greatest element of A and thus a ##\leq##-maximal element.[/B]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Assume that
VrhoZna said:
For all (A,≤)(A,\leq), the set of all chains of (A,≤)(A,\leq) has an ⊆\subseteq-maximal element.
Then in conditions of the Zorn lemma this maximal chain has an upper bound. This upper bound is a maximal element of ##A##.
 
  • #3
I see now. If ##y \in A## and ##c \leq y##, then X is a subset of the chain ##X \cup \{y\}## and so ##X = X \cup \{y\}## and ##y \in X## and we must have y = c.
 

FAQ: Prove Zorn's Lemma is equivalent to the following statement

What is Zorn's Lemma?

Zorn's Lemma is a mathematical proposition that states that if a partially ordered set has the property that every chain (totally ordered subset) has an upper bound, then the set must have a maximal element.

What is the statement that is equivalent to Zorn's Lemma?

The statement that is equivalent to Zorn's Lemma is the Axiom of Choice, which states that given any collection of non-empty sets, it is possible to choose one element from each set.

How is Zorn's Lemma related to the Axiom of Choice?

Zorn's Lemma is equivalent to the Axiom of Choice, meaning that if one of these statements is true, then the other must also be true. This relationship was first established by mathematician Ernst Zermelo in 1904.

Why is Zorn's Lemma important in mathematics?

Zorn's Lemma is important in mathematics because it allows for the existence of maximal elements in partially ordered sets, which has many applications in areas such as set theory, topology, and functional analysis.

How is Zorn's Lemma used in mathematical proofs?

Zorn's Lemma is often used as a tool in mathematical proofs to show the existence of objects that satisfy certain properties. It is also used to prove the well-ordering principle, which states that every set can be well-ordered (meaning there is a defined first element, second element, etc.).

Similar threads

Back
Top