True. A useful fact is that squaring is strictly increasing on ordinals. If , monotonicity in both arguments gives , and strict increase in the right argument for the positive left factor gives . Hence .
Suppose, for a contradiction, that . Again using monotonicity and associativity of ordinal multiplication,
This contradicts the hypothesized equality of the outer terms. Reversing the roles excludes . If either factor is zero, they already commute. Therefore the commuting squares of ordinals property is
The proof uses monotonicity, which follows directly from the ordered-copy definition; it does not assume a cancellation law for ordinals.
Ordinal exponentiation is defined by transfinite recursion:
when is a nonzero limit ordinal. If , each successor step and each supremum show that is nondecreasing. If , transfinite induction strengthens this to strict increase: , and the value at a limit exceeds every earlier value.
Strict increase can disappear when the base changes. For example, with ,
because for every positive finite , both finite powers have leading term , and taking the supremum gives .
We next prove
Apply transfinite induction to . The zero and successor cases follow directly from the recursive definitions and the associativity of ordinal multiplication. At a limit , continuity of ordinal multiplication in its right argument gives
The superficially similar identity is false: for , , and ,
Finally,
For the first equivalence, bases zero and one fail, while strict increase embeds every countable ordinal into the powers of any base . For the second, immediately gives . Conversely, if , then . Every exponent below the first uncountable ordinal is countable, so each has cardinality at most ; the supremum of such ordinals still has cardinality at most and is therefore below the second uncountable ordinal .
Always true. Under the synthetic definition of ordinal multiplication, is the order type of consecutive copies of . Grouping the copies first into blocks of copies, or first into single blocks of type , gives the same lexicographic well-order. Hence
True. Left distributivity over a sum in the right argument,
follows by transfinite induction on from the recursive definition of ordinal multiplication; the successor and limit steps are exactly its defining clauses.