Let (X,≤) be a partially ordered set X.
Claim
Zorn's Lemma and Hausdorff Maximal Principle are equivalent.
Zorn's Lemma
Suppose X has the property that every chain has an upper bound in X. Then the set X contains at least one maximal element.
Hausdorff Maximal Principle
X holds maximal chain.
1.Zorn's Lemma → Hausdorff Maximal Princple
Let C(X) be the family of every chain of X and Let C be the chain of C(X) and Let C=∪C.
Then for a,b,∈C there ∃C1,C2s.t.a∈C1∈Candb∈C2∈C
But C1⊂C2orC2⊂C1 since C is chain.
If C1⊂C2, a,b∈C2. Then a≤borb≤a since C2 is a chain of X and viceversa
Thus C is a chain of X
Now Hausdorff Maximal Principle holds since C⊂C(X) has maximal chain C
2. Hausdorff Maximal Princple → Zorn's Lemma
Suppose every chain of X has an upper bound. Then for the maximal chain of X,C, let m∈X be the upperbound of C.
Now suppose x∈Xandx>m Then
C∪{x} is also a chain since x is comparable with an element in C
But it contradicts to the fact that C is maximal chain since C∪{x}⊋C
Thus m is a maximal element of X
Answer
For 1. I would write: Let C(X) be the set of chains of X, partially ordered by ⊂. Then show that ⊂ is a transitive relation on C(X). (Which is fairly obvious)...Then show, as you did that if S is a ⊂-chain of C(X), then ∪S∈C(X) and ∪S is a ⊂-upper bound for S. Zorn's Lemma then implies that C(X) has a ⊂-maximal member....Part 2 is OK.
As I said in a comment, it's my opinion that your presentation could be a bit better.
No comments:
Post a Comment