If is a countable ordinal and , then must be a limit ordinal. Choose a countable cofinal sequence in . The internal axiom of choice gives, for every , a bijection between and some ordinal below ; that ordinal is externally countable, so every is countable. Hence is countable. But contains the full power set , which is uncountable by Cantor theorem, a contradiction.
Suppose that the countable ordinal satisfied . The axioms force to be a limit ordinal above , so choose an externally countable cofinal function into , with . The internal Axiom of choice gives a bijection in between each and some ordinal below . Every such ordinal is externally a countable set, hence every is externally countable. The countable union of countable sets is countable, so
would be countable. But contains the full power set , which is uncountable by Cantor theorem. This contradiction is the result Countable rank-initial segment cannot model ZFC, and therefore
The definable power set performs one definability step over the single structure , whereas the constructible power set contains subsets of created at arbitrarily late stages of the constructible hierarchy.
For the concrete case , there are only countably many first-order formulas and finite tuples of natural-number parameters, so is a countable set. In contrast, the constructible universe satisfies ZFC, and Cantor theorem makes its full power set uncountable inside . Consequently
so the two notions do not agree in general.
False. Take , the power set of the first infinite ordinal . Every subset of has rank at most , and an infinite cofinal subset has rank exactly , so
which is a countable ordinal. But Cantor theorem shows that is an uncountable set.
Assertion (iii) can be false. Let and . Part (ii) and the currying law for cardinal exponentiation give
By Cantor theorem, , and therefore
Choose sets of cardinalities . Their cardinal arithmetic operations are
where is the set of functions . The relation means that there is an injective function .
The currying law for cardinal exponentiation follows from the explicit bijection
and proves
Moreover, is the cardinality of the power set of a set of size , so Cantor theorem gives
For completeness, identify each cardinal with its initial ordinal. Suppose that some infinite violates , and choose the least such cardinal. Well-order the pairs first by and then lexicographically. Every proper initial segment is contained in together with finitely many boundary pieces for some , and has cardinality below by minimality. The resulting well-order therefore has cardinality at most . The reverse inequality is immediate from , contradicting the choice of . Thus the square of an infinite cardinal satisfies .
If , monotonicity now gives
Hence the sum and product of two infinite cardinals obey
Assertion (i) can be false. For any infinite , take . Then , so
An alphabet is a finite nonempty set of symbols. A word over an alphabet is a finite sequence of symbols from , including the empty word ; the set of all words is . A formal language over is any subset .
A regular expression is defined recursively from , , and the individual symbols by the operations of finite union, concatenation, and Kleene star. Its language is defined by
There are only countably many regular expressions: each is a finite word over a finite collection of symbols and punctuation. On the other hand, for every nonempty finite alphabet, is countably infinite, so its power set is uncountable by the Cantor theorem. Thus there are uncountably many languages but only countably many languages denoted by regular expressions. Consequently
A class in set theory in the model is a collection
defined by a first-order formula with parameters . A set-theoretic class function is a definable class relation for which every input in its domain has exactly one output. Informally, the Axiom schema of replacement says that the image of any set under any such function class is again a set.
Define the class function by the natural-number recursion theorem,
Then , and Replacement applied to the set gives
as a set.
Call a set small when it injects into some . Every natural number is finite, and every member of is finite, so each injects into . Hence . The set itself injects into , and its hereditary members are natural numbers, so .
We next prove by mathematical induction. The case was just proved. If and , then , so inclusion injects into and makes small. Every set below in its transitive closure is already below and is small by the induction hypothesis. The set itself injects into . Thus every member of is small.
By Cantor theorem, , so the are distinct and injects into . Thus is small. Every other member of belongs to for some , and is small by the preceding paragraph. Therefore . This proves the finite-power-set hereditary-small construction.
The structure is not a model of ZF because it fails the Axiom of union. If were small, it would inject into some . But , since , so restriction would inject
Together with the singleton injection , the Cantor-Schröder-Bernstein theorem would produce a bijection, contradicting Cantor theorem. Hence is not small and therefore does not belong to . Since has no union inside the class, the Union axiom fails.