- Thread starter
- #1

- Jun 22, 2012

- 2,891

I am reading Micheal Searcoid's book: "Elements of Abstract Analysis" ... ...

I am currently focused on understanding Chapter 1: Sets ... and in particular Section 1.4 Ordinals ...

I need some help in fully understanding Theorem 1.4.6 ...

Theorem 1.4.6 reads as follows:

My question regarding the above proof by Micheal Searcoid is as follows:

How do we know that \(\displaystyle \alpha\) and \(\displaystyle \beta\) are not disjoint? ... indeed ... can they be disjoint?

What happens to the proof if \(\displaystyle \alpha \cap \beta = \emptyset\)?

Help will be appreciated ...

Peter

==========================================================================

It may help MHB

readers of the above post to have access to the start of Searcoid's section on the ordinals ... so I am providing the same ... as follows:

Hope that helps ...

Peter

I am currently focused on understanding Chapter 1: Sets ... and in particular Section 1.4 Ordinals ...

I need some help in fully understanding Theorem 1.4.6 ...

Theorem 1.4.6 reads as follows:

My question regarding the above proof by Micheal Searcoid is as follows:

How do we know that \(\displaystyle \alpha\) and \(\displaystyle \beta\) are not disjoint? ... indeed ... can they be disjoint?

What happens to the proof if \(\displaystyle \alpha \cap \beta = \emptyset\)?

Help will be appreciated ...

Peter

==========================================================================

It may help MHB

readers of the above post to have access to the start of Searcoid's section on the ordinals ... so I am providing the same ... as follows:

Hope that helps ...

Peter

Last edited: