Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2007 iii Paper 14 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
An ultrafilter on is a family satisfying the proper filter axioms: , , closure under finite intersections, and upward closure under inclusion. In addition, for every , exactly one of and belongs to . Equivalently, an ultrafilter is a maximal proper filter. The principal ultrafilter at consists of all subsets containing ; an ultrafilter not of this form is a nonprincipal ultrafilter.
To prove existence, start with the cofinite filter and order the proper filters containing it by inclusion. The union of a chain is still a proper filter: finitely many of its members lie in one filter of the chain, and no constituent contains the empty set. Thus Zorn lemma supplies a maximal such filter . If , adjoining cannot generate a proper filter; otherwise maximality fails. Consequently some has , so by upward closure. This proves the ultrafilter alternative. No finite can belong to , because is cofinite and already belongs to . In particular contains no singleton and is a nonprincipal ultrafilter. The same argument, starting from any proper filter, proves the ultrafilter lemma used below.
Define to be the set of all ultrafilters on , with basic open setsThey form a topological basis because and . Moreover , so they are clopen sets. This is the compact Hausdorff topology on ultrafilters. If , some belongs to but not , and then and are disjoint open neighbourhoods of the two points. Thus is Hausdorff.
For compactness, take an open cover and refine it by basic open sets . If no finite subfamily covers, then for every finite collection of indices the intersection is nonempty. Indeed, if that intersection were empty, the corresponding would cover , and every ultrafilter would contain at least one of them by the finite ultrafilter alternative. The complements therefore have the finite intersection property and generate a proper filter. Extend it to an ultrafilter by the proved ultrafilter lemma. Then for every , so belongs to none of the covering , a contradiction. A finite basic subcover lies inside a finite subcover of the original cover. HenceThe map , where is the principal ultrafilter at , identifies the discrete natural numbers with a dense subset: any nonempty has and contains for .
Hindman theorem states that every finite colouring of the positive integers admits an increasing sequence whose finite-sums setis monochromatic. We now give the Idempotent-ultrafilter proof of Hindman's theorem. For , write . The addition on is defined byTake an idempotent ultrafilter on the natural numbers , whose existence is allowed, so . It is a nonprincipal ultrafilter: addition of principal points is , whereas no positive integer satisfies .
Exactly one colour class belongs to . DefineBy idempotence, . The idempotent-ultrafilter star-set lemma needed for the recursion is that whenever . To prove it, put . Idempotence again givesFor , we have and , hence . Thus , proving the lemma by upward closure.
Choose . Suppose has been constructed. Every factor ofbelongs to : the translate factors do by the just-proved lemma, and the last factor does because it is cofinite and is a nonprincipal ultrafilter. The finite intersection is therefore nonempty. Choose in it. Then and every with lie in , so . This constructs a strictly increasing sequence, indeed , and proves Hindman theorem.
Finally apply Hindman theorem to obtain a monochromatic finite-sums set . We construct a divisibility chain inside a finite-sums set using disjoint successive blocks of indices. Start with . If , take unused terms after all indices used so far, and split them into two groups of consecutive terms. In each group its partial sums, including , contain two in the same congruence class modulo by the pigeonhole principle. Their difference is a nonempty consecutive sum divisible by , and positivity makes it at least . Let be the sum of these two selected sums. Then and .