AoPSWiki
Want to learn how to tackle those tough AMC/AIME/Olympiad counting and probability problems? Check out Art of Problem Solving's Intermediate Counting & Probability by David Patrick.

Zorn's Lemma

From AoPSWiki

Revision as of 02:20, 11 April 2009 by Boy Soprano II (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Zorn's Lemma is a set theoretic result which is equivalent to the Axiom of Choice.

Contents

Background

Let A be a partially ordered set.

We say that A is inductively ordered if every totally ordered subset T of A has an upper bound, i.e., an element a \in A such that for all x\in T, x \le a. We say that A is strictly inductively ordered if every totally ordered subset T of A has a least upper bound, i.e., an upper bound a so that if b is an upper bound of T, then a \le b.

An element m \in A is maximal if the relation a \ge m implies a=m. (Note that a set may have several maximal elements.)

We say a function f : A \to A is increasing if x \le f(x) for all x\in A.

Statement

Every inductively ordered set A has a maximal element.

Proof (using the Axiom of Choice)

We first prove some intermediate results, viz., Bourbaki's Theorem (also known as the Bourbaki-Witt theorem).

Let A be a strictly inductively ordered set, and let f: A \to A be an increasing function. Pick some a \in A. Let A' be the set of elements x \in A such that a \le A. Evidently, A' is stricty inductively ordered, for if T is a totally ordered subset of A', then it has a least upper bound in A, which is evidently greater than a, so this least upper bound is an element of A'. We say that a subset B \subseteq A' is admissable if it satisfies these conditions:

  • a\in B
  • f(B) \subseteq B
  • For every totally ordered subset T \subseteq B, the least upper bound of T in A' is an element of B.

Let M be the union of all admissable subsets of A'. We note that M is not empty, as A' is an admissable subset of itself, and all admissable sets contain a. Then M is the least admissable set, under order by inclusion.

We say that an element c \in M is an extreme point if x\in M, x < c together imply f(x) \le c. For an extreme point c denote by M_c the set of x\in M such that x \le c or f(c) \le x.

Lemma 1.

For each extreme point c, M_c = M.

Proof. It suffices to show that M_c is an admissable set. Evidently, a\le c, so a \in M_c. Now, let x be an element of M_c. If x = c, then evidently, f(c) \le f(x), so f(x) \in M_c. If x < c, then since c is an extreme point, f(x)\le c, so f(x) \in M_c. On the other hand, if f(c) \le x, then f(c) \le x \le f(x), so f(x) \in M_c. Therefore f(M_c) \subseteq M_c.

Let T be a totally ordered subset of M_c. Then T has a least upper bound s\in A'. Since M is admissable, s\in M. Now, if s \le c, then evidently s\in M_c. On the other hand, if s\ge c, then either f(c) \le s, or every element of T is less than or equal to c, so s \le c. Hence the least upper bound of every totally ordered subset T of M_c is an element of M_c, so M_c is admissable. Therefore M \subseteq M_c; since we know M_c \subseteq M, it follows that M= M_c.

Lemma 2.

Every element of M is an extreme point.

Proof. Let E be the set of extreme points of M. As before, it suffices to show that E is an admissable set. Evidently, a is an extreme point of M, as no element of M is less than a, so every element less than a is also less than or equal to f(a). Now, suppose c is an extreme point of M. Then for any x\in M, if x < f(c), then by Lemma 1, x\le c. If x=c, then f(x) = f(c), so f(x) \le f(c); if x<c, then since c is an extreme point, f(x) \le c \le f(c). Therefore f(c) is an extreme point, so f(E) \subseteq E.

Now, let T be a totally ordered set of extreme points. Consider the least upper bound s of T in M. If x is an element of M strictly less than s, then s must be strictly less than some element c \in T. But c is an extreme point, so f(x) \le c \le s. Therefore s is an extreme point, i.e., an element of E. It follows that E is an admissable set, so as before, E=M.

Theorem 3 (Bourbaki).

For any strictly inductively ordered set A and any increasing function f: A \to A, there exists an element x_0 of A such that x_0 = f(x_0).

Proof. Choose an arbitrary a\in A, and define A' as before. Let M be the least admissable subset of A', as before. By Lemmata 2 and 1, for all elements a,b \in M, either a \le b, or b \le f(b) \le a. Therefore M is totally ordered under the ordering induced by A. Then M has a least upper bound x_0 which is an element of M. We note that f(x_0) \in M, so f(x_0) \le x_0, and since f is increasing, x_0 \le f(x_0). Hence x_0 = f(x_0), as desired.

Note that thus far, we have not used the Axiom of Choice. In the next corollary, however, we will use the Axiom of Choice.

Corollary 4.

Let A be a strictly inductively ordered set. Then A has a maximal element.

Proof. Suppose the contrary. Then by the Axiom of Choice, for each x \in A, we may define f(x) to be an element strictly greater than x. Then f is an increasing function, but for no x \in A does x = f(x), which contradicts the Bourbaki-Witt Theorem.

Corollary 5 (Zorn's Lemma).

Let A be an inductively ordered set. Then A has a maximal element.

Proof. Let T be the family of totally ordered subsets of A.

We claim that under the order relation \subseteq, T is a strictly inductively ordered set. Indeed, if \{ X_ \}_{i\in I} is a totally ordered subset of T, then Z = \bigcup_{i\in I} X_i is evidently the least upper bound of the X_i, and if a,b \in Z, then for some i,j \in I, a \in X_i and b \in X_j; one of X_i and X_j is a subset of the other, by assumption, so a and b are comparable. It follows that Z is totally ordered, i.e., Z \in T.

Now, by Corollary 4, there exists a maximal element P of Z. This set P is totally ordered, so it has an upper bound x_0 in A. Then P \cup \{x_0\} is a totally ordered set, so by the maximality of P, x_0 \in P. Now, if y\ge x_0, then P \cup \{y\} is a totally ordered set, so y \in P and y\le x_0, so y=x_0. Therefore x_0 is a maximal element, as desired.

References

See Also

Want to learn how to tackle those tough AMC/AIME/Olympiad algebra problems? Check out Art of Problem Solving's Intermediate Algebra by Richard Rusczyk and Mathew Crawford. Over 1600 problems!
© Copyright 2008 AoPS Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. • FoundationPrivacyContact Us