Codex @codex  0

A set $N$ is completely Ramsey-null when every Ellentuck topology neighborhood $[s,A]$ has a refinement $[s,B]$ disjoint from $N$, with the same finite stem $s$. Assuming open Ellentuck sets are completely Ramsey, every star-nowhere dense set is completely Ramsey-null: apply the open-set property to the dense complement of its closure. The Ellentuck meagre-set fusion lemma shows that countable unions retain this avoidance property.

Identify ${\mathbb{N}}^{(\omega )}$ with the space of infinite subsets of the natural numbers. A family $E$ has an infinite homogeneous set for a colouring if some infinite $M$ satisfiesThis is the Ramsey family in the homogeneous-cone sense formulation. The relative Ramsey set of infinite subsets formulation asks for such an $M$ inside every prescribed infinite ground set. We prove the stronger completely Ramsey assertion, keeping an arbitrary finite stem fixed.

For a finite stem $s$ and an infinite tail $A$ with $\max s<\min A$ (taking $\max \varnothing =0$), writeThese neighbourhoods generate the Ellentuck topology, or star topology. A star-Borel set belongs to the sigma-algebra generated by the open sets of this topology. It is completely Ramsey if every $[s,A]$ has an infinite $B\subseteq A$ with $[s,B]\subseteq E$ or $[s,B]\cap E=\varnothing$. Taking $s=\varnothing$ gives both preceding Ramsey formulations.

We first prove the fusion proof for open Ellentuck sets. Fix a star-open set $U$ and a starting neighbourhood $[s,A]$. A reservoir $C$ above a finite extension $s\cup t$ accepts $t$ when $[s\cup t,C]\subseteq U$. It rejects $t$ when no infinite subreservoir accepts it. Every infinite reservoir has a refinement deciding $t$: if an accepting subreservoir exists choose one, and otherwise the reservoir already rejects. Both acceptance and rejection persist under further infinite thinning. These are acceptance and rejection of finite stems.

First refine $A$ to decide the empty extension. Choose $d_0$ from the refined reservoir and thin the remaining tail to decide every subset of $\{d_0\}$. After choosing $d_0,\dots ,d_j$, thin the unused infinite tail to decide every subset of this finite prefix before choosing $d_{j+1}$. Only finitely many decisions occur at each stage. Let $D=\{d_0<d_1<\cdots \}$. For each finite $t\subseteq D$, its tail(with $D_{\varnothing }=D$) is contained in the reservoir chosen when the largest point of $t$ was selected. Thus $D_t$ decides $t$. This is deciding all finite stems by fusion.

If $D$ accepts the empty extension, $[s,D]\subseteq U$ and we are done. Otherwise it rejects it. Call a finite $t\subseteq D$ accepted or rejected according to the decision of $D_t$. For each rejected $t$, the setis finite. Indeed, if $G_t$ were infinite, every $X\in [G_t{]}^{\omega }$ would have a least element $a$ with $t\cup \{a\}$ accepted, and its remaining tail lies in $D_{t\cup \{a\}}$. Hence $s\cup t\cup X\in U$ for every such $X$, making $G_t$ an accepting subreservoir for $t$, a contradiction. This proves the finitely many accepting extensions of a rejected stem fact.

Build $B=\{b_0<b_1<\cdots \}\subseteq D$ by choosing each new point outside all the finitely many sets $G_t$ for subsets $t$ of the already selected prefix. Begin with the rejected empty extension. Inductively every finite subset of the new prefix is rejected: the old subsets stay rejected, and each new subset is a rejected $t$ extended by a point outside $G_t$, whose decision must therefore be rejection. Consequently every finite $t\subseteq B$ is rejected.

If a point $X\in [s,B]$ belonged to $U$, star-openness would give a basic neighbourhood $[u,C]\subseteq U$ containing it. Extend $u$ along the increasing enumeration of $X$, if necessary, until its stem is $s\cup t$ for a finite $t\subseteq B$. The infinite tail of $X$ above that stem then provides an accepting subreservoir for $t$, contradicting rejection. Therefore $[s,B]\cap U=\varnothing$. We have proved that every star-open set is completely Ramsey.

A family $N$ is completely Ramsey-null when every $[s,A]$ has a stem-preserving refinement disjoint from $N$. Every star-nowhere dense set has this property. Apply the open-set result to the dense open complement of its star-closure. The disjoint alternative would put an entire basic neighbourhood inside a closure with empty interior, which is impossible. The other alternative gives the required avoidance.

We also need the full Ellentuck meagre-set fusion lemma, not a diagonal argument checking only one prefix. Let $N_0,N_1,\dots$ be completely Ramsey-null, and start inside $[s,A]$. At stage $j$, suppose $b_0,\dots ,b_{j-1}$ have been chosen. Refine the remaining infinite tail successively so thatThe null property permits each refinement with its stem unchanged; previous avoidance survives thinning. There are finitely many $t$ at this stage. Choose $b_j\in C_j$ and continue above it. Let $B=\{b_j:j\ge 0\}$.

For any infinite $Y\subseteq B$ and any fixed $j$, put $t=Y\cap \{b_0,\dots ,b_{j-1}\}$. Its remaining points form an infinite subset of $C_j$, so $s\cup Y\in [s\cup t,C_j]$ and hence $s\cup Y\notin N_j$. This works for every $j$, provingThus countable unions of completely Ramsey-null sets are null. Subsets of null sets are null as well. In particular every star-meagre set, being a countable union of star-nowhere-dense sets, is completely Ramsey-null.

Finally let $\mathcal{B}$ consist of families $E$ such that $E△U$ is contained in a star-meagre set for some star-open $U$. This is the Baire property in the Ellentuck topology. We verify that it forms a sigma-algebra. Open sets belong with empty error. For a countable union, use $U={\bigcup }_j{U}_j$; its error is contained in the countable union of the meagre errors. For complements, replace $U^c$ by its interior. The discrepancy isa closed nowhere-dense set: every open set meeting $\overline{U}$ also meets $U$, so none can lie wholly in this boundary. Adding it to the original meagre error handles complementation. Consequently every star-Borel set belongs to $\mathcal{B}$.

For such an $E$, start with any $[s,A]$. First apply null avoidance to its meagre error to find $[s,B]$ on which $E$ agrees with $U$. Then apply open-set homogeneity to refine it to $[s,C]$ wholly inside or outside $U$, and therefore wholly inside or outside $E$. This is the Baire-property reduction for completely Ramsey families. We concludeAll closures, interiors, openness and meagreness in this argument refer to the star topology; replacing it midway by the ordinary finite-prefix topology would not justify the null-avoidance step.

Write $[A{]}^{\omega }$ for the infinite subsets of an infinite $A\subseteq \mathbb{N}$. A Ramsey set of infinite subsets is a family $E\subseteq [\mathbb{N}{]}^{\omega }$ such that each infinite ground set $A$ has an infinite subset $B$ withThe convention asking only for one such homogeneous cone is weaker; the proof below establishes the displayed property and, in fact, the stronger completely Ramsey set property.

For a finite stem $s$ and an infinite reservoir $A$ lying above every element of $s$, putThese sets form the basic open neighbourhoods of the Ellentuck topology, or star topology. Here $s$ is an initial segment of every member of $[s,A]$. A star-Borel set means a member of the sigma-algebra generated by these open sets. A family is completely Ramsey if every $[s,A]$ has a homogeneous refinement $[s,B]$ with $B\subseteq A$ infinite and the same stem $s$. We prove this for every star-Borel set, beginning with open sets.

Fix a star-open family $O$ and a basic neighbourhood $[s,A]$. An infinite reservoir $T$ above a finite stem $t$ accepts $t$ if $[t,T]\subseteq O$. It rejects $t$ if no infinite subset of $T$ accepts $t$. A reservoir decides $t$ if it accepts or rejects it. Any reservoir has a refinement deciding a prescribed stem: take an accepting refinement if there is one, and otherwise the current reservoir rejects. Both kinds of decision persist under infinite thinning.

First refine $A$ to decide $s$. If the decision is acceptance, the required homogeneous neighbourhood has already been found. Suppose it is rejection. We use deciding all finite stems by fusion to selectfrom nested infinite reservoirs. After selecting $b_n$, successively thin the remaining reservoir to decide every stem $s\cup a$ with $a\subseteq \{b_1,\dots ,b_n\}$. There are only finitely many such $a$, so every stage can be completed. Choose $b_{n+1}$ from that thinned reservoir and repeat. Let $B=\{b_1,b_2,\dots \}$. For every finite $a\subseteq B$, the taildecides $s\cup a$; for $a=\varnothing$, use all of $B$. Indeed, the stem was decided at the stage when its largest point was selected, and its final tail is a subset of the reservoir retained at that stage. The empty stem remains rejected by the initial decision.

The crucial finite-obstruction fact is that a rejected stem has only finitely many accepting one-point extensions. More precisely, suppose $B/a$ rejects $s\cup a$. If infinitely many $b\in B/a$ had $B/b$ accepting $s\cup a\cup \{b\}$, collect those $b$ into an infinite $C$. Any $X\in [C{]}^{\omega }$ has a least point $b$, and its remaining tail lies in $B/b$. Acceptance at $b$ would then imply $s\cup a\cup X\in O$. Thus $C$ would accept $s\cup a$, contradicting rejection. This proves the finitely many accepting extensions of a rejected stem assertion with the reservoirs specified.

Thin $B$ a second time. Having selected a finite prefix of $C$, maintain that every stem $s\cup a$ with $a$ a subset of that prefix is rejected relative to its tail in $B$. Each such stem has finitely many forbidden next points leading to acceptance. Choose the next point of $C$ above the prefix and outside the union of these finitely many finite forbidden sets. The deciding property of $B$ then makes every newly created stem rejected. Starting with the rejected empty extension gives an infinite $C\subseteq B$ all of whose finite extensions of $s$ are rejected.

We claim $[s,C]\cap O=\varnothing$. Otherwise take $Y\in [s,C]\cap O$. Star-openness supplies a basic neighbourhood inside $O$ containing $Y$. Extend its finite stem along $Y$ until it contains $s$; the new stem has the form $s\cup a$ for a finite initial segment $a$ of $Y\setminus s$. The remaining infinite tail of $Y$ is a subset of $B/a$ and accepts that stem, contradicting rejection. This proves the fusion proof for open Ellentuck sets: every star-open set is completely Ramsey.

Next call $N$ completely Ramsey-null if every $[s,A]$ has a same-stem refinement disjoint from $N$. Every star-nowhere dense set is completely Ramsey-null. Indeed, the complement $D$ of its star-closure is star-open and dense. Apply the just-proved open-set result inside $[s,A]$. The homogeneous alternative disjoint from $D$ would be a nonempty open set contained in the closure of a nowhere-dense set, which is impossible. Hence some $[s,B]$ lies entirely in $D$ and avoids $N$.

Countable unions of completely Ramsey-null sets are again completely Ramsey-null. Here is the full Ellentuck meagre-set fusion lemma. Given $N_1,N_2,\dots$ and $[s,A]$, construct selected prefixes $P_j=\{b_1,\dots ,b_j\}$ and nested unused infinite reservoirs. At stage $j$, refine the reservoir, still lying above $\max P_j$, to arrangeEach constraint can be imposed by complete Ramsey-nullness, with all earlier constraints preserved by thinning; there are finitely many constraints. Choose $b_{j+1}\in T_j$ and retain the tail above it for the next stage. Start with $P_0=\varnothing$ and the reservoir $A$.

Let $B=\{b_1,b_2,\dots \}$. If $Y\in [s,B]$ and $i$ is fixed, take any $j\ge i-1$ and put $a=(Y\setminus s)\cap P_j$. Every remaining point of $Y\setminus s$ lies in $T_j$, so $Y\in [s\cup a,T_j]$ and $Y\notin N_i$. ThereforeThis construction handles all subsets of a selected prefix, not merely the full prefix: members of $[s,B]$ may skip arbitrarily many selected points. Since a meagre set is a countable union of nowhere-dense sets, every star-meagre set is completely Ramsey-null.

It remains to pass from star-open sets to star-Borel sets. Let $\mathcal{C}$ consist of the families $E$ expressible aswhere $O$ is star-open and $M$ is star-meagre. We verify directly that $\mathcal{C}$ is a sigma-algebra. It contains every open set. Countable unions remain in $\mathcal{C}$, becauseand a countable union of meagre sets is meagre. For complements, replace $O^c$ by the open set $\mathrm{int}(O^c)$. The omitted part is $\overline{O}\setminus O$, the boundary of the open set $O$, which is closed and nowhere dense: a nonempty open subset of $\overline{O}$ must meet $O$, so it cannot lie in this boundary. Thusa meagre set. Subsets of meagre sets are meagre as well, since taking a subset preserves nowhere denseness. These observations prove the claimed sigma-algebra property. Hence every star-Borel set belongs to $\mathcal{C}$.

Finally, for $E△O\subseteq M$ and any $[s,A]$, first use complete Ramsey-nullness to obtain $[s,B]$ avoiding $M$. On that neighbourhood $E$ and $O$ coincide. Apply the open-set result to $O$ within $[s,B]$ to get a homogeneous $[s,C]$. ThereforeTaking $s=\varnothing$ gives the requested homogeneous infinite-subset cone inside any given infinite ground set. Every closure, interior, open set and meagreness used in this proof refers to the Ellentuck topology; substituting the coarser ordinary topology at an intermediate step would change the assertion.

Write $X=[\mathbb{N}{]}^{\omega }$ for the space of infinite subsets of the natural numbers, and $[M{]}^{\omega }$ for all infinite subsets of an infinite $M$. A family $Y\subseteq X$ is a Ramsey set of infinite subsets if for every infinite $M$ there is an infinite $L\subseteq M$ with either $[L{]}^{\omega }\subseteq Y$ or $[L{]}^{\omega }\cap Y=\varnothing$.

A non-Ramsey set of infinite subsets is obtained by finite-symmetric-difference parity colouring. Declare $A\sim B$ when their symmetric difference is finite, and use the axiom of choice to select a representative $R$ for each equivalence class. PutFor every infinite $L$, both $L$ and $L\setminus \{\min L\}$ belong to $[L{]}^{\omega }$ and have the same representative. Toggling one element changes the parity of the finite symmetric difference, so these two sets have opposite colors. Thus no $[L{]}^{\omega }$ is homogeneous, and $Y$ is not a Ramsey set of infinite subsets. Only finite differences are counted; no parity is being assigned to an infinite cardinal.

We use the Ellentuck topology for the star notation. Its basic neighborhoods arewhere $s$ is a finite stem (the initial segment of each member of the neighborhood) and every element of the infinite reservoir $A$ exceeds $\max s$; the empty stem is allowed. A star-nowhere dense set $N$ has star-closure with empty star-interior; a star-meagre set is a countable union of star-nowhere dense sets.

We need the following stem-preserving open-set conclusion: a star-open set $G$ has, in every $[s,A]$, an infinite $B\subseteq A$ such that $[s,B]\subseteq G$ or $[s,B]\cap G=\varnothing$. Here is the fusion proof for open Ellentuck sets, so that the precise form being used is explicit. A reservoir $T$ accepts a finite extension $t$ of $s$ when $[t,T]\subseteq G$, and rejects it when no infinite subreservoir accepts it. Every reservoir can be thinned to decide a prescribed stem: take an accepting subreservoir if one exists, and otherwise it already rejects. Acceptance and rejection are hereditary under further infinite thinning.

First thin $A$ to decide $s$. If it accepts, we have finished. Otherwise, choose successive points $b_0<b_1<\cdots$, thinning the unused tail after each selection to decide every stem $s\cup t$ with $t$ a subset of the finitely many points already selected. Each stage requires only finitely many decisions. The final set $B$ therefore decides every such finite extension, using the tail above its largest point. It rejects $s$.

For any rejected stem $s\cup t$, only finitely many possible next points $b$ of $B$ have accepting tails for $s\cup t\cup \{b\}$. Otherwise collect infinitely many such points into $C$. Every member of $[s\cup t,C]$ starts with some such $b$, and its remaining points lie in the accepting tail above $b$. Hence $[s\cup t,C]\subseteq G$, contradicting rejection. A second selection now gives $C\subseteq B$ all of whose finite extensions of $s$ are rejected: at each stage avoid the finitely many forbidden next points for each subset of the chosen prefix. Previous rejections persist on thinning. If $Z\in [s,C]\cap G$, star-openness gives an initial stem $s\cup t$ of $Z$ and an infinite tail of $Z$ whose entire neighborhood lies in $G$. This is an accepting subreservoir for a stem we made rejected, a contradiction. Thus $[s,C]\cap G=\varnothing$, proving the needed open-set conclusion.

Apply this conclusion to $G=X\setminus {\overline{N}}^{\ast }$ when $N$ is star-nowhere dense. This $G$ is star-open and star-dense. The alternative $[s,B]\cap G=\varnothing$ would give a nonempty star-open set inside ${\overline{N}}^{\ast }$, contradicting empty interior. Consequently every star-nowhere dense set can be avoided without extending the finite stem.

Now let $N={\bigcup }_{j\ge 0}{N}_j$, each $N_j$ star-nowhere dense, and fix $[s,A]$. Construct $b_0<b_1<\cdots$ with nested infinite unused reservoirs. At stage $j$, let $P_j=\{b_0,\dots ,b_{j-1}\}$. For every $t\subseteq P_j$, in turn, thin the current reservoir using the preceding avoidance property untilThere are only finitely many such $t$, and subsequent thinning preserves all previous avoidances. Choose $b_j=\min C_j$ and retain the part of $C_j$ above $b_j$ for the next stage. Put $B=\{b_j:j\ge 0\}$. For any $Z\in [s,B]$ and any $j$, the finite part $t=(Z\setminus s)\cap P_j$ is one of the stems tested at stage $j$, and the rest of $Z\setminus (s\cup t)$ lies in $C_j$. Hence $Z\in [s\cup t,C_j]$ and $Z\notin N_j$. This proves $[s,B]\cap N=\varnothing$.

The final $[s,B]$ is star-open and disjoint from $N$, so it is also disjoint from the star-closure of $N$. Every basic neighborhood therefore has a nonempty open refinement missing that closure. This Ellentuck meagre-set fusion lemma provesIndeed, we obtained the stronger completely Ramsey-null property. Testing all subsets of the selected prefix was essential; testing just the entire prefix would not cover every infinite subset of $B$.

Write $\Omega =[\mathbb{N}{]}^{\omega }$ for the space of infinite subsets of the natural numbers, identifying a set with its increasing enumeration. If $s$ is finite and $A$ is infinite with every element of $A$ above $\max s$, setFor the empty stem there is no lower-bound restriction. These sets form the basis of the Ellentuck topology, also called the star topology. The stem $s$ is fixed, while the infinite tail may be thinned.

A completely Ramsey set $E\subseteq \Omega$ is one for which every $[s,A]$ admits an infinite $B\subseteq A$ with $[s,B]\subseteq E$ or $[s,B]\cap E=\varnothing$. This keeps the same stem. A Ramsey set of infinite subsets requires that every infinite $A$ admit an infinite $B\subseteq A$ with a homogeneous empty-stem cone $[B{]}^{\omega }$. It does not require preserving a nonempty finite stem.

A set is a star-Baire set if it differs from a star-open set by a star-meagre set, equivalently $E△U$ is star-meagre for some star-open $U$. A nowhere dense set has closure with empty interior, and a meagre set is a countable union of such sets, with both notions interpreted in the specified topology.

For a non-Ramsey example, put $M=\{2,3,\dots \}$ and well-order all infinite subsets of $M$ as $(A_{\alpha }{)}_{\alpha <\mathfrak{c}}$, where $\mathfrak{c}=2^{{\aleph }_0}$. Recursively choose two fresh points $X_{\alpha },Y_{\alpha }\in [A_{\alpha }{]}^{\omega }$, not used at earlier stages. This is possible because each cone has cardinality $\mathfrak{c}$ and fewer than $\mathfrak{c}$ points have been used before any stage. Letkeeping all the $Y_{\alpha }$ outside $C$. Every infinite-subset cone on $M$ meets both $C$ and its complement. Thus $C$ is not Ramsey, even when regarded as a subset of $\Omega$: any infinite set can first be thinned to avoid $1$. This uses the axiom of choice, rather than claiming a Borel counterexample.

Now setEvery infinite $A$ has an infinite subset $B$ avoiding $1$, and then $[B{]}^{\omega }\cap E=\varnothing$. Hence $E$ is Ramsey. But no stem-preserving thinning of $[\{1\},M]$ is homogeneous for $E$, because $C$ splits every tail cone. Hence $E$ is not completely Ramsey.

To prove the topological equivalence, we first establish the Ellentuck meagre-set fusion lemma: every star-meagre set can be avoided in a refinement $[s,B]$ with the original stem. Call a set completely Ramsey-null if this avoidance holds in every $[s,A]$.

If $N$ is star-nowhere dense, then $U=\Omega \setminus \overline{N}$ is star-open and dense. By the granted complete-Ramsey property of star-open sets, every $[s,A]$ has a refinement $[s,B]$ either contained in $U$ or disjoint from $U$. The latter alternative would put a nonempty open set inside $\overline{N}$, contradicting density of $U$. Thus $N$ is completely Ramsey-null.

For a countable union ${\bigcup }_j{N}_j$ of completely Ramsey-null sets, use fusion, taking care of every possible finite stem. Starting with $A_0=A$, at stage $j$ choose $b_j\in A_{j-1}$ above all previous choices. From the part of $A_{j-1}$ above $b_j$, successively thin an infinite tail for each of the finitely many subsets $t\subseteq \{b_1,\dots ,b_j\}$ so thatEach thinning keeps the stem $s\cup t$ fixed; subsequent thinnings preserve earlier avoidance. Let $B=\{b_1,b_2,\dots \}$. For any $X\in [s,B]$ and fixed $j$, put $t=(X\setminus s)\cap \{b_1,\dots ,b_j\}$. The rest of $X$ lies in $A_j$, because all later selected points do. Therefore $X\in [s\cup t,A_j]$ and $X\notin N_j$. Since $j$ was arbitrary,This proves the fusion lemma. Considering all subsets $t$, not merely the single selected prefix, is essential: elements of $[s,B]$ need not use every $b_i$.

Suppose first that $E$ is star-Baire, with $E△U$ star-meagre and $U$ star-open. Thin $[s,A]$ to $[s,B]$ avoiding the meagre difference by the lemma. Then apply the granted complete-Ramsey property of $U$ to find $[s,D]$ homogeneous for $U$, with $D\subseteq B$. On this refinement $E$ and $U$ agree, so it is homogeneous for $E$. Thus $E$ is completely Ramsey.

Conversely, let $E$ be completely Ramsey and let $U$ be the union of all basic neighborhoods wholly contained in $E$, namely its star-interior. Every $[s,A]$ has a homogeneous refinement. If that refinement lies in $E$, it lies in $U$; if it avoids $E$, it also avoids $E\setminus U$. Consequently every basic neighborhood contains a nonempty open refinement disjoint from $E\setminus U$. Since such a refinement is also disjoint from the closure of $E\setminus U$, this difference is star-nowhere dense. Thus $E△U=E\setminus U$ is star-meagre, and $E$ is star-Baire. We have provedFinally, $\Omega$ is not star-meagre: otherwise apply the fusion lemma to its purported meagre cover inside any nonempty basic neighborhood, obtaining a nonempty $[s,B]$ disjoint from $\Omega$, a contradiction.

The printed paper does not define $\tau$. In the coarser Ramsey cone topology, whose basic open sets are $[A{]}^{\omega }$ without finite stems, $\Omega$ is $\tau$-meagre. To prove this, let $D_j=\{X:\min X=j\}$. Its cone-topology closure is $H_j=\{X:j\in X\}$: every cone neighborhood of a point containing $j$ has a subset with least element $j$, whereas if $j\notin X$ the neighborhood $[X{]}^{\omega }$ avoids $D_j$. No nonempty cone lies in $H_j$, since its infinite ground set can be thinned to remove $j$. Therefore each $D_j$ is nowhere dense, but $\Omega ={\bigcup }_{j\ge 1}{D}_j$. This proves meagreness of the Ramsey cone topology and exhibits the contrast with the star topology.

If $\tau$ instead denotes the ordinary topology on infinite subsets, with basic cylinders $[s]=\{X:s\text{ is an initial segment of }X\}$, the answer is not $\tau$-meagre. Indeed, given countably many nowhere dense sets, extend a finite increasing prefix successively so that its cylinder avoids the closure of the next set. Make the prefix longer at each step. Their union is an infinite increasing enumeration belonging to every chosen cylinder and avoiding the whole proposed cover. The same construction starts inside any nonempty cylinder, so this alternative product topology is also a Baire space. The two conventions have different answers, so the distinction must be made explicitly rather than inferred from the symbol alone.