For an infinite well-orderable cardinal number , each strict total order is a subset of , giving at most possibilities by the square of an infinite cardinal. For a lower bound, order two-element blocks by the ordinal index and independently reverse each block according to a subset of . Transport along . Distinct subsets give distinct orders. The usual axiom of choice development supplies these product identities; for well-orderable cardinals they are already provable in ZF.
For an infinite cardinal number , its cofinality is
viewing as an initial ordinal. Equivalently it is the smallest cardinal number which is the domain size of a cofinal map into .
Put and . Suppose , and choose cofinal ordinals for . Put . Their union is , so infinite cardinal arithmetic gives
Apply the König theorem for cardinal numbers to . Each successor cardinal is at most , whence
Here the last equalities use the currying law for cardinal exponentiation and square of an infinite cardinal. This contradiction proves the cofinality of a power-set cardinal bound
Let be the set of strict total orders on . Each is a subset of , so the square of an infinite cardinal gives
For the lower bound, use the set and order the two-element blocks by their first coordinates, using the well-order of . For every , put before exactly when , reversing them otherwise. This defines a strict total order for each , and different subsets give different orders. Transport these orders to along a fixed bijection . Thus , and the Cantor-Schröder-Bernstein theorem gives
If using the customary axiom of choice development of infinite cardinal arithmetic, its use here is precisely to supply and . The ordering construction makes no further choices. It proves the cardinality of the family of strict total orders. For itself an initial ordinal, these particular product identities can also be proved in ZF by well-ordering pairs according to their maximum coordinate, so full axiom of choice is stronger than this instance intrinsically requires.
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
For infinite cardinals and , the axiom of choice and the square of an infinite cardinal give
The maximum is a lower bound for both operations, while both are bounded above by respectively and , where .