Assuming the axiom of choice, the well-ordering theorem makes every set equipotent to an initial ordinal. The infinite initial ordinals are exactly the , so every infinite cardinal is for a unique ordinal .
A cardinal number is identified with an initial ordinal, namely an ordinal not in bijection with any smaller ordinal. An inaccessible cardinal, in the strong sense used here, is an uncountable regular cardinal that is also a strong limit cardinal. Thus
A worldly cardinal is a cardinal number whose level of the Von Neumann hierarchy satisfies all of ZFC:
Worldliness is this model-theoretic condition; regularity is not part of its definition. The original PDF asks for these two notions; the extra comma in the local TeX makes “cardinal” look like a separate requested item.
An aleph number is an infinite initial ordinal. More explicitly,
for a limit ordinal . By the well-ordering theorem, every set is equipotent to an ordinal and hence to a unique initial ordinal. If the set is infinite, that initial ordinal occurs in the aleph enumeration. Thus every infinite set has cardinality for a unique ordinal .
We next prove the square of an infinite cardinal. Suppose otherwise and let be the least infinite cardinal for which . Well-order by increasing
breaking ties lexicographically. The predecessors of lie inside for some . If , then ; by minimality, when is infinite, while the finite case is immediate. Every proper initial segment therefore has cardinality less than .
Recursively assign to each pair the least ordinal below not already assigned to one of its predecessors. Such an ordinal always exists by the preceding bound, so this constructs an injection . The map gives the reverse injection, and the Cantor-Schröder-Bernstein theorem yields
For infinite , finitely many applications of the cardinal comparability principle let us choose of largest cardinality . Then
where the final equality follows from infinite cardinal arithmetic. Consequently
For a countable family of pairwise different infinite cardinalities, the answer is yes. Regard initial ordinals as sets and take
The cardinalities are pairwise distinct, but every is a subset of . Hence
which is the countable family of distinct infinite cardinalities with a largest member construction.
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
Assume the axiom of choice. By the well-ordering theorem, every set is bijective with an ordinal, and hence with an initial ordinal. Any two ordinals are comparable, so for any sets either injects into or injects into . Transitivity is immediate, and antisymmetry on cardinalities follows from the Cantor-Schröder-Bernstein theorem. Thus cardinal comparison is a total order.
Conversely, assume the cardinal comparability principle. Given any set , let be its Hartogs ordinal. By Hartogs theorem, there is no injection . Comparability therefore supplies an injection . Pulling the ordinal order back to gives a well-order of . Hence every set can be well-ordered, and the well-ordering theorem implies the axiom of choice.
Under the axiom of choice, identify every infinite cardinal with its initial ordinal. We prove by transfinite induction on infinite cardinals. The countable case follows from the usual diagonal enumeration of .
For the induction step, well-order the Cartesian product by first comparing
and then using lexicographic order among pairs with the same maximum. The predecessors of lie in , where . Put . If is infinite, the induction hypothesis makes this predecessor set have cardinal at most ; if is finite, the same conclusion is immediate.
Let be the order type of this well-order. Every proper initial segment of therefore has cardinal less than . Hence , since otherwise its initial segment of order type would have cardinal . Thus . The map gives the reverse injection, and the Cantor-Schröder-Bernstein theorem yields
An initial ordinal is an ordinal that is not equipotent to any smaller ordinal. Equivalently, it is the least ordinal having its cardinality. The aleph numbers enumerate the infinite initial ordinals:
is the least initial ordinal greater than , and at a limit , is the least initial ordinal greater than every for .
Each is infinite and initial by construction. Conversely, let be an infinite initial ordinal. The infinite initial ordinals below form a set and therefore have an ordinal order type . The recursive enumeration above lists exactly those predecessors before stage , so its next value is .
Read literally, “has cardinality ” is too weak: has cardinality but is not initial. The valid characterization is
If “has cardinality” in the question means “is the cardinal represented by,” this is precisely the requested statement.
Assuming the axiom of choice, every infinite cardinal satisfies
One proof takes a least counterexample , identifies cardinals with initial ordinals, and well-orders first by . Every proper initial segment then has cardinality below by minimality, so the whole order has cardinality at most , contradicting the choice of .