home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!news.tek.com!psgrain!charnel!rat!usc!news.service.uci.edu!beckman.com!dn66!a_rubin
- Newsgroups: sci.math
- Subject: Re: Assorted questions and problems
- Message-ID: <a_rubin.721437741@dn66>
- From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
- Date: 10 Nov 92 23:22:21 GMT
- References: <BxDJ8v.DCw@world.std.com> <1992Nov8.181631.13298@Princeton.EDU> <96778@netnews.upenn.edu>
- Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.
- Nntp-Posting-Host: dn66.dse.beckman.com
- Lines: 23
-
- In <96778@netnews.upenn.edu> weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
-
- >In article <1992Nov8.181631.13298@Princeton.EDU>, tao@fine (Terry Tao) writes:
-
- >>(3) Assume the axiom of choice and the axiom of the continuum. Is it
- >>true that two chains (totally ordered sets) which both have the
- >>cardinality of the continuum have a one-to-one and onto order
- >>preserving mapping betweem them?
-
- >Of course not. It's almost embarrassing to mention the counterexamples,
- >but here goes: (0,1) and [0,1]. The question you meant to ask, I assume,
- >was if the orderings were dense. In that case, a back and forth argument
- >shows the two are isomorphic. I'm pretty certain you need CH for this--I
- >think Shelah has the contrary model.
-
- You mean "(countably) complete" rather than "dense", don't you?
- Q x R and R x Q clearly aren't isomorphic; and I don't think you need CH if
- it is "complete".
- --
- Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
- 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
- My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
- My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything important.
-