what is “Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set”?












0












$begingroup$


Can anyone make me understand what is "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set"?



I know what is Uncountablity and Well ordered set.



Thank You in Advance.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    An ordered set order-isomorphic to the first uncountable ordinal?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    I think context will be needed
    $endgroup$
    – Jonathan Hebert
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    Can you please explain in simple terms?@LordSharktheUnknown
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:09






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are four concepts involved in your question. Do you know what a set is? Do you know what it means for it to be well-ordered? Do you know what it means for a set to be uncountable? Do you know what minimal (in this context) means? If you clarify where your difficulty is, there is a greater chance you'll get a useful answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Ittay Weiss
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I know the meaning of every terms But I found it difficult to understand when they are together.@IttayWeiss
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 13:33
















0












$begingroup$


Can anyone make me understand what is "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set"?



I know what is Uncountablity and Well ordered set.



Thank You in Advance.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    An ordered set order-isomorphic to the first uncountable ordinal?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    I think context will be needed
    $endgroup$
    – Jonathan Hebert
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    Can you please explain in simple terms?@LordSharktheUnknown
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:09






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are four concepts involved in your question. Do you know what a set is? Do you know what it means for it to be well-ordered? Do you know what it means for a set to be uncountable? Do you know what minimal (in this context) means? If you clarify where your difficulty is, there is a greater chance you'll get a useful answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Ittay Weiss
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I know the meaning of every terms But I found it difficult to understand when they are together.@IttayWeiss
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 13:33














0












0








0





$begingroup$


Can anyone make me understand what is "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set"?



I know what is Uncountablity and Well ordered set.



Thank You in Advance.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Can anyone make me understand what is "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set"?



I know what is Uncountablity and Well ordered set.



Thank You in Advance.







general-topology






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Apr 20 '18 at 11:54









cmicmi

1,136312




1,136312








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    An ordered set order-isomorphic to the first uncountable ordinal?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    I think context will be needed
    $endgroup$
    – Jonathan Hebert
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    Can you please explain in simple terms?@LordSharktheUnknown
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:09






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are four concepts involved in your question. Do you know what a set is? Do you know what it means for it to be well-ordered? Do you know what it means for a set to be uncountable? Do you know what minimal (in this context) means? If you clarify where your difficulty is, there is a greater chance you'll get a useful answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Ittay Weiss
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I know the meaning of every terms But I found it difficult to understand when they are together.@IttayWeiss
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 13:33














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    An ordered set order-isomorphic to the first uncountable ordinal?
    $endgroup$
    – Lord Shark the Unknown
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    I think context will be needed
    $endgroup$
    – Jonathan Hebert
    Apr 20 '18 at 11:57










  • $begingroup$
    Can you please explain in simple terms?@LordSharktheUnknown
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:09






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    There are four concepts involved in your question. Do you know what a set is? Do you know what it means for it to be well-ordered? Do you know what it means for a set to be uncountable? Do you know what minimal (in this context) means? If you clarify where your difficulty is, there is a greater chance you'll get a useful answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Ittay Weiss
    Apr 20 '18 at 12:17






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I know the meaning of every terms But I found it difficult to understand when they are together.@IttayWeiss
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Apr 20 '18 at 13:33








2




2




$begingroup$
An ordered set order-isomorphic to the first uncountable ordinal?
$endgroup$
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Apr 20 '18 at 11:57




$begingroup$
An ordered set order-isomorphic to the first uncountable ordinal?
$endgroup$
– Lord Shark the Unknown
Apr 20 '18 at 11:57












$begingroup$
I think context will be needed
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Hebert
Apr 20 '18 at 11:57




$begingroup$
I think context will be needed
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Hebert
Apr 20 '18 at 11:57












$begingroup$
Can you please explain in simple terms?@LordSharktheUnknown
$endgroup$
– cmi
Apr 20 '18 at 12:09




$begingroup$
Can you please explain in simple terms?@LordSharktheUnknown
$endgroup$
– cmi
Apr 20 '18 at 12:09




4




4




$begingroup$
There are four concepts involved in your question. Do you know what a set is? Do you know what it means for it to be well-ordered? Do you know what it means for a set to be uncountable? Do you know what minimal (in this context) means? If you clarify where your difficulty is, there is a greater chance you'll get a useful answer.
$endgroup$
– Ittay Weiss
Apr 20 '18 at 12:17




$begingroup$
There are four concepts involved in your question. Do you know what a set is? Do you know what it means for it to be well-ordered? Do you know what it means for a set to be uncountable? Do you know what minimal (in this context) means? If you clarify where your difficulty is, there is a greater chance you'll get a useful answer.
$endgroup$
– Ittay Weiss
Apr 20 '18 at 12:17




1




1




$begingroup$
I know the meaning of every terms But I found it difficult to understand when they are together.@IttayWeiss
$endgroup$
– cmi
Apr 20 '18 at 13:33




$begingroup$
I know the meaning of every terms But I found it difficult to understand when they are together.@IttayWeiss
$endgroup$
– cmi
Apr 20 '18 at 13:33










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Perhaps what you might be missing is a theorem of set theory which says (roughly speaking) that any set of well ordered sets is well ordered.



To be precise, suppose that ${cal A} ={A_i}_{i in I}$ is a set, each of whose elements $A_i$ is a well ordered set, and let's suppose that no two elements of ${cal A}$ are order isomorphic (i.e. for all $i ne j in I$ there does not exist an order preserving bijection between $A_i$ and $A_j$). Let's define a relation on ${cal A}$, where $A_i < A_j$ means that there exists an order preserving injection $f : A_i to A_j$.





  • Theorem: This relation is a well-ordering on ${cal A}$. Therefore, ${cal A}$ has a minimal element.


So, to say that a well-ordered set $A$ is a "minimimal uncountable well ordered set" simply means that for any set ${cal A}$ of uncountable well-ordered sets, no two of which are order isomorphic, if $A in {cal A}$ then $A$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$.



There are a few more theorems to ponder which help to iron out the understanding of this concept:




  • Theorem: Suppose $A$ is an uncountable well ordered set, and suppose that for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is countable. Then $A$ is a minimal uncountable well ordered set.


  • Theorem: Any two minimal uncountable well ordered sets are order isomorphic. (So it is fair to speak about the minimal uncountable well ordered set, because it is unique up to order isomorphism)



For a more concrete example of this concept, the set of natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ is the "minimal infinite well ordered set": for any set ${cal A}$ of well ordered infinite sets (no two of which are order isomorphic), if $mathbb{N} in {cal A}$ then $mathbb{N}$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$. The other theorems mentioned have analogues here:




  • Theorem: If $A$ is an infinite well ordered set, and if for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is finite, then $A$ is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.


  • Theorem: Any minimal infinite well ordered set is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.







share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    So $mathbb R$ is not well ordered minimal uncountable set for sure.. As we remove an element , It still remains uncountable...So can you give me a concrete example of $S_{Omega}$?@Lee Mosher
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Dec 27 '18 at 16:27










  • $begingroup$
    @cmi : Where is there an "$S_Omega$" anywhere on this page?
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Towers
    Dec 28 '18 at 8:41










  • $begingroup$
    If you have something else to ask that is related to this question and answer, it is best that you ask it in a new and fully formulated question, instead of asking it in a comment with new notation, which very few people will stumble across, and fewer still will understand.
    $endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Dec 28 '18 at 16:08



















0












$begingroup$

@cmi ℝ in the usual ordering is not well ordered. And if equipped with proper ordering, ℝ can be isomorphic to the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set" (assuming the continuum hypothesis), because under the continuum hypothesis, ℝ has the same cardinality as the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set", and therefore a bijection between them exists. We can then just define the ordering on ℝ based on the bijection and the ordering of the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set".



So the reason of ℝ (with the usual ordering) being "not well ordered minimal uncountable set" is not the reason you gave (can remove element), but the its ordering.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2745911%2fwhat-is-minimal-uncountable-well-ordered-set%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    Perhaps what you might be missing is a theorem of set theory which says (roughly speaking) that any set of well ordered sets is well ordered.



    To be precise, suppose that ${cal A} ={A_i}_{i in I}$ is a set, each of whose elements $A_i$ is a well ordered set, and let's suppose that no two elements of ${cal A}$ are order isomorphic (i.e. for all $i ne j in I$ there does not exist an order preserving bijection between $A_i$ and $A_j$). Let's define a relation on ${cal A}$, where $A_i < A_j$ means that there exists an order preserving injection $f : A_i to A_j$.





    • Theorem: This relation is a well-ordering on ${cal A}$. Therefore, ${cal A}$ has a minimal element.


    So, to say that a well-ordered set $A$ is a "minimimal uncountable well ordered set" simply means that for any set ${cal A}$ of uncountable well-ordered sets, no two of which are order isomorphic, if $A in {cal A}$ then $A$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$.



    There are a few more theorems to ponder which help to iron out the understanding of this concept:




    • Theorem: Suppose $A$ is an uncountable well ordered set, and suppose that for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is countable. Then $A$ is a minimal uncountable well ordered set.


    • Theorem: Any two minimal uncountable well ordered sets are order isomorphic. (So it is fair to speak about the minimal uncountable well ordered set, because it is unique up to order isomorphism)



    For a more concrete example of this concept, the set of natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ is the "minimal infinite well ordered set": for any set ${cal A}$ of well ordered infinite sets (no two of which are order isomorphic), if $mathbb{N} in {cal A}$ then $mathbb{N}$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$. The other theorems mentioned have analogues here:




    • Theorem: If $A$ is an infinite well ordered set, and if for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is finite, then $A$ is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.


    • Theorem: Any minimal infinite well ordered set is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.







    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      So $mathbb R$ is not well ordered minimal uncountable set for sure.. As we remove an element , It still remains uncountable...So can you give me a concrete example of $S_{Omega}$?@Lee Mosher
      $endgroup$
      – cmi
      Dec 27 '18 at 16:27










    • $begingroup$
      @cmi : Where is there an "$S_Omega$" anywhere on this page?
      $endgroup$
      – Eric Towers
      Dec 28 '18 at 8:41










    • $begingroup$
      If you have something else to ask that is related to this question and answer, it is best that you ask it in a new and fully formulated question, instead of asking it in a comment with new notation, which very few people will stumble across, and fewer still will understand.
      $endgroup$
      – Lee Mosher
      Dec 28 '18 at 16:08
















    2












    $begingroup$

    Perhaps what you might be missing is a theorem of set theory which says (roughly speaking) that any set of well ordered sets is well ordered.



    To be precise, suppose that ${cal A} ={A_i}_{i in I}$ is a set, each of whose elements $A_i$ is a well ordered set, and let's suppose that no two elements of ${cal A}$ are order isomorphic (i.e. for all $i ne j in I$ there does not exist an order preserving bijection between $A_i$ and $A_j$). Let's define a relation on ${cal A}$, where $A_i < A_j$ means that there exists an order preserving injection $f : A_i to A_j$.





    • Theorem: This relation is a well-ordering on ${cal A}$. Therefore, ${cal A}$ has a minimal element.


    So, to say that a well-ordered set $A$ is a "minimimal uncountable well ordered set" simply means that for any set ${cal A}$ of uncountable well-ordered sets, no two of which are order isomorphic, if $A in {cal A}$ then $A$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$.



    There are a few more theorems to ponder which help to iron out the understanding of this concept:




    • Theorem: Suppose $A$ is an uncountable well ordered set, and suppose that for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is countable. Then $A$ is a minimal uncountable well ordered set.


    • Theorem: Any two minimal uncountable well ordered sets are order isomorphic. (So it is fair to speak about the minimal uncountable well ordered set, because it is unique up to order isomorphism)



    For a more concrete example of this concept, the set of natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ is the "minimal infinite well ordered set": for any set ${cal A}$ of well ordered infinite sets (no two of which are order isomorphic), if $mathbb{N} in {cal A}$ then $mathbb{N}$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$. The other theorems mentioned have analogues here:




    • Theorem: If $A$ is an infinite well ordered set, and if for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is finite, then $A$ is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.


    • Theorem: Any minimal infinite well ordered set is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.







    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      So $mathbb R$ is not well ordered minimal uncountable set for sure.. As we remove an element , It still remains uncountable...So can you give me a concrete example of $S_{Omega}$?@Lee Mosher
      $endgroup$
      – cmi
      Dec 27 '18 at 16:27










    • $begingroup$
      @cmi : Where is there an "$S_Omega$" anywhere on this page?
      $endgroup$
      – Eric Towers
      Dec 28 '18 at 8:41










    • $begingroup$
      If you have something else to ask that is related to this question and answer, it is best that you ask it in a new and fully formulated question, instead of asking it in a comment with new notation, which very few people will stumble across, and fewer still will understand.
      $endgroup$
      – Lee Mosher
      Dec 28 '18 at 16:08














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    Perhaps what you might be missing is a theorem of set theory which says (roughly speaking) that any set of well ordered sets is well ordered.



    To be precise, suppose that ${cal A} ={A_i}_{i in I}$ is a set, each of whose elements $A_i$ is a well ordered set, and let's suppose that no two elements of ${cal A}$ are order isomorphic (i.e. for all $i ne j in I$ there does not exist an order preserving bijection between $A_i$ and $A_j$). Let's define a relation on ${cal A}$, where $A_i < A_j$ means that there exists an order preserving injection $f : A_i to A_j$.





    • Theorem: This relation is a well-ordering on ${cal A}$. Therefore, ${cal A}$ has a minimal element.


    So, to say that a well-ordered set $A$ is a "minimimal uncountable well ordered set" simply means that for any set ${cal A}$ of uncountable well-ordered sets, no two of which are order isomorphic, if $A in {cal A}$ then $A$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$.



    There are a few more theorems to ponder which help to iron out the understanding of this concept:




    • Theorem: Suppose $A$ is an uncountable well ordered set, and suppose that for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is countable. Then $A$ is a minimal uncountable well ordered set.


    • Theorem: Any two minimal uncountable well ordered sets are order isomorphic. (So it is fair to speak about the minimal uncountable well ordered set, because it is unique up to order isomorphism)



    For a more concrete example of this concept, the set of natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ is the "minimal infinite well ordered set": for any set ${cal A}$ of well ordered infinite sets (no two of which are order isomorphic), if $mathbb{N} in {cal A}$ then $mathbb{N}$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$. The other theorems mentioned have analogues here:




    • Theorem: If $A$ is an infinite well ordered set, and if for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is finite, then $A$ is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.


    • Theorem: Any minimal infinite well ordered set is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.







    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Perhaps what you might be missing is a theorem of set theory which says (roughly speaking) that any set of well ordered sets is well ordered.



    To be precise, suppose that ${cal A} ={A_i}_{i in I}$ is a set, each of whose elements $A_i$ is a well ordered set, and let's suppose that no two elements of ${cal A}$ are order isomorphic (i.e. for all $i ne j in I$ there does not exist an order preserving bijection between $A_i$ and $A_j$). Let's define a relation on ${cal A}$, where $A_i < A_j$ means that there exists an order preserving injection $f : A_i to A_j$.





    • Theorem: This relation is a well-ordering on ${cal A}$. Therefore, ${cal A}$ has a minimal element.


    So, to say that a well-ordered set $A$ is a "minimimal uncountable well ordered set" simply means that for any set ${cal A}$ of uncountable well-ordered sets, no two of which are order isomorphic, if $A in {cal A}$ then $A$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$.



    There are a few more theorems to ponder which help to iron out the understanding of this concept:




    • Theorem: Suppose $A$ is an uncountable well ordered set, and suppose that for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is countable. Then $A$ is a minimal uncountable well ordered set.


    • Theorem: Any two minimal uncountable well ordered sets are order isomorphic. (So it is fair to speak about the minimal uncountable well ordered set, because it is unique up to order isomorphism)



    For a more concrete example of this concept, the set of natural numbers $mathbb{N}$ is the "minimal infinite well ordered set": for any set ${cal A}$ of well ordered infinite sets (no two of which are order isomorphic), if $mathbb{N} in {cal A}$ then $mathbb{N}$ is the minimal element of ${cal A}$. The other theorems mentioned have analogues here:




    • Theorem: If $A$ is an infinite well ordered set, and if for each $b in A$ the set ${a in A mid a < b}$ is finite, then $A$ is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.


    • Theorem: Any minimal infinite well ordered set is order isomorphic to $mathbb{N}$.








    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Apr 20 '18 at 18:51

























    answered Apr 20 '18 at 14:27









    Lee MosherLee Mosher

    50.6k33787




    50.6k33787












    • $begingroup$
      So $mathbb R$ is not well ordered minimal uncountable set for sure.. As we remove an element , It still remains uncountable...So can you give me a concrete example of $S_{Omega}$?@Lee Mosher
      $endgroup$
      – cmi
      Dec 27 '18 at 16:27










    • $begingroup$
      @cmi : Where is there an "$S_Omega$" anywhere on this page?
      $endgroup$
      – Eric Towers
      Dec 28 '18 at 8:41










    • $begingroup$
      If you have something else to ask that is related to this question and answer, it is best that you ask it in a new and fully formulated question, instead of asking it in a comment with new notation, which very few people will stumble across, and fewer still will understand.
      $endgroup$
      – Lee Mosher
      Dec 28 '18 at 16:08


















    • $begingroup$
      So $mathbb R$ is not well ordered minimal uncountable set for sure.. As we remove an element , It still remains uncountable...So can you give me a concrete example of $S_{Omega}$?@Lee Mosher
      $endgroup$
      – cmi
      Dec 27 '18 at 16:27










    • $begingroup$
      @cmi : Where is there an "$S_Omega$" anywhere on this page?
      $endgroup$
      – Eric Towers
      Dec 28 '18 at 8:41










    • $begingroup$
      If you have something else to ask that is related to this question and answer, it is best that you ask it in a new and fully formulated question, instead of asking it in a comment with new notation, which very few people will stumble across, and fewer still will understand.
      $endgroup$
      – Lee Mosher
      Dec 28 '18 at 16:08
















    $begingroup$
    So $mathbb R$ is not well ordered minimal uncountable set for sure.. As we remove an element , It still remains uncountable...So can you give me a concrete example of $S_{Omega}$?@Lee Mosher
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Dec 27 '18 at 16:27




    $begingroup$
    So $mathbb R$ is not well ordered minimal uncountable set for sure.. As we remove an element , It still remains uncountable...So can you give me a concrete example of $S_{Omega}$?@Lee Mosher
    $endgroup$
    – cmi
    Dec 27 '18 at 16:27












    $begingroup$
    @cmi : Where is there an "$S_Omega$" anywhere on this page?
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Towers
    Dec 28 '18 at 8:41




    $begingroup$
    @cmi : Where is there an "$S_Omega$" anywhere on this page?
    $endgroup$
    – Eric Towers
    Dec 28 '18 at 8:41












    $begingroup$
    If you have something else to ask that is related to this question and answer, it is best that you ask it in a new and fully formulated question, instead of asking it in a comment with new notation, which very few people will stumble across, and fewer still will understand.
    $endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Dec 28 '18 at 16:08




    $begingroup$
    If you have something else to ask that is related to this question and answer, it is best that you ask it in a new and fully formulated question, instead of asking it in a comment with new notation, which very few people will stumble across, and fewer still will understand.
    $endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Dec 28 '18 at 16:08











    0












    $begingroup$

    @cmi ℝ in the usual ordering is not well ordered. And if equipped with proper ordering, ℝ can be isomorphic to the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set" (assuming the continuum hypothesis), because under the continuum hypothesis, ℝ has the same cardinality as the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set", and therefore a bijection between them exists. We can then just define the ordering on ℝ based on the bijection and the ordering of the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set".



    So the reason of ℝ (with the usual ordering) being "not well ordered minimal uncountable set" is not the reason you gave (can remove element), but the its ordering.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      @cmi ℝ in the usual ordering is not well ordered. And if equipped with proper ordering, ℝ can be isomorphic to the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set" (assuming the continuum hypothesis), because under the continuum hypothesis, ℝ has the same cardinality as the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set", and therefore a bijection between them exists. We can then just define the ordering on ℝ based on the bijection and the ordering of the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set".



      So the reason of ℝ (with the usual ordering) being "not well ordered minimal uncountable set" is not the reason you gave (can remove element), but the its ordering.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        @cmi ℝ in the usual ordering is not well ordered. And if equipped with proper ordering, ℝ can be isomorphic to the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set" (assuming the continuum hypothesis), because under the continuum hypothesis, ℝ has the same cardinality as the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set", and therefore a bijection between them exists. We can then just define the ordering on ℝ based on the bijection and the ordering of the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set".



        So the reason of ℝ (with the usual ordering) being "not well ordered minimal uncountable set" is not the reason you gave (can remove element), but the its ordering.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        @cmi ℝ in the usual ordering is not well ordered. And if equipped with proper ordering, ℝ can be isomorphic to the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set" (assuming the continuum hypothesis), because under the continuum hypothesis, ℝ has the same cardinality as the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set", and therefore a bijection between them exists. We can then just define the ordering on ℝ based on the bijection and the ordering of the "Minimal Uncountable well-ordered set".



        So the reason of ℝ (with the usual ordering) being "not well ordered minimal uncountable set" is not the reason you gave (can remove element), but the its ordering.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 23 at 18:35









        ALifeALife

        12




        12






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2745911%2fwhat-is-minimal-uncountable-well-ordered-set%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            android studio warns about leanback feature tag usage required on manifest while using Unity exported app?

            SQL update select statement

            'app-layout' is not a known element: how to share Component with different Modules