 |
|
| |
|
 |
 |
at Global Oneness Community.
Share your dreams and let others help you with the interpretation!
Dream Sharing Forum
|
 |
Cantor's diagonal argument - Real numbers |  | Cantor's diagonal argument - Real numbers: Encyclopedia II - Cantor's diagonal argument - Real numbers |  | Cantor's original proof shows that the interval [0,1] is not countably infinite.
The proof by contradiction proceeds as follows:
Assume (for the sake of argument) that the interval [0,1] is countably infinite.
We may then enumerate all numbers in this interval as a sequence, ( r1, r2, r3, ... )
We already know that each of these numbers may be represented as a decimal expansion.
We arrange the numbers in a list (they do not need to be in orde ...
See also:Cantor's diagonal argument, Cantor's diagonal argument - Real numbers, Cantor's diagonal argument - Why this does not work on integers, Cantor's diagonal argument - General sets |  | | Cantor's diagonal argument, Cantor's diagonal argument - General sets, Cantor's diagonal argument - Real numbers, Cantor's diagonal argument - Why this does not work on integers |  | |
|  |  | Cantor's diagonal argument: Encyclopedia II - Cantor's diagonal argument - Real numbers
Cantor's diagonal argument - Real numbers
Cantor's original proof shows that the interval [0,1] is not countably infinite.
The proof by contradiction proceeds as follows:
- Assume (for the sake of argument) that the interval [0,1] is countably infinite.
- We may then enumerate all numbers in this interval as a sequence, ( r1, r2, r3, ... )
- We already know that each of these numbers may be represented as a decimal expansion.
- We arrange the numbers in a list (they do not need to be in order; in fact, some countable sets, such as the rational numbers, cannot all be listed in their natural order, but can nonetheless be listed). In the case of numbers with two decimal expansions, like 0.499 ... = 0.500 ..., we pick the one ending in nines. Assume, for example, that the decimal expansions of the beginning of the sequence are as follows:
r1 = 0 . 5 1 0 5 1 1 0 ...
r2 = 0 . 4 1 3 2 0 4 3 ...
r3 = 0 . 8 2 4 5 0 2 6 ...
r4 = 0 . 2 3 3 0 1 2 6 ...
r5 = 0 . 4 1 0 7 2 4 6 ...
r6 = 0 . 9 9 3 7 8 3 8 ...
r7 = 0 . 0 1 0 5 1 3 5 ...
...
- We shall now construct a real number x in [0,1] by considering the kth digit after the decimal point of the decimal expansion of rk. The digits we will consider are underlined and in bold face, illustrating why this is called the diagonal proof.
r1 = 0 . 5 1 0 5 1 1 0 ...
r2 = 0 . 4 1 3 2 0 4 3 ...
r3 = 0 . 8 2 4 5 0 2 6 ...
r4 = 0 . 2 3 3 0 1 2 6 ...
r5 = 0 . 4 1 0 7 2 4 6 ...
r6 = 0 . 9 9 3 7 8 3 8 ...
r7 = 0 . 0 1 0 5 1 3 5 ...
...
- From these digits we define the digits of x as follows.
- if the kth digit of rk is 5 then the kth digit of x is 4
- if the kth digit of rk is not 5 then the kth digit of x is 5
- The number x is clearly a real number (since all decimal expansions represent real numbers) in [0,1]. For the above sequence, for example, we obtain the following decimal expansion:
x = 0 . 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 ...
- Hence we must have rn = x for some n, since we have assumed that ( r1, r2, r3, ... ) enumerates all real numbers in [0, 1].
- However, because of the way we have chosen 4's and 5's as digits in step (6), x differs in the nth decimal place from rn, so x is not in the sequence ( r1, r2, r3, ... ).
- This sequence is therefore not an enumeration of the set of all reals in the interval [0,1]. This is a contradiction.
- Hence the assumption (1) that the interval [0,1] is countably infinite must be false.
It is a direct corollary of this result that the set R of all real numbers is uncountable. If R were countable, we could enumerate all of the real numbers in a sequence, and then get a sequence enumerating [0,1] by removing all of the real numbers outside this interval. But we have just shown that this latter list cannot exist. Alternatively, we could show that [0,1] and R are the same size by constructing a bijection between them. This is slightly awkward to do, though possible, for the closed interval [0,1]; for the open interval (0,1) we might use defined by .
Other related archivesCantor's theorem, Georg Cantor, New Foundations, Russell's paradox, W. V. Quine, axiom of comprehension, bijection, cardinality, continuum hypothesis, countably infinite, decimal expansion, generalized continuum hypothesis, halting problem, interval, numeral system, original argument, power set, proof, proof by contradiction, real numbers, sequence, set, set of all sets, set theory, subsets, surjective, table of mathematical symbols
 Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Real numbers", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki |
|
« Back
|
Search the Global Oneness web site |
|
|
|
|
 |
Sneak-Peek of Global Oneness Community
Hi friend! The Global Oneness Community, the place for information and sharing about Oneness is not really launched yet (you will see there is still some clean up to do) ...but it is now open for a sneak-peek! And if you wish - please register and become one of the very first members to do so! Jonas
Forum Home,
Articles,
Photo Gallery,
Videos,
News,
Sitemap
...and much more!
|