Sign up ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Alfred Tarski, in his paper "Ueber unerreichbare Kardinalzahlen" Fund. Math. vol 30 (1938) pp 68-89 proves the followig theorem of ZFC "If the cardinal of the set Y is equal to the cardinal of the set of the subsets of Y that are not equipotent with Y, then the cardinal of Y is (strongly) inaccessible". The proof of the paper is rather long and involved. Question: Is there another known simpler proof of this theorem ? Gérard Lang

share|cite|improve this question
Are you sure you quoted the theorem correctly? The continuum hypothesis implies that a set of size $\aleph_1$ has only $\aleph_1$ countable subsets. –  Andreas Blass Jan 19 '11 at 16:34
I'm confused by the statement of the theorem. There are $(2^{\aleph_0})^{\aleph_0}=2^{\aleph_0}=\aleph_1$ many countable subsets of $\aleph_1$, assuming $CH$, so this would imply that $\omega_1$ is strongly inaccessible. What am I missing? –  Noah Schweber Jan 19 '11 at 16:38
YES,I am VERY SORRY, I did not think "inaccessible", but "regular !!! I will write the correct question; Gérard lang –  Gérard Lang Jan 19 '11 at 18:58
There is no need to write another question, it was already answered here. –  Andrés Caicedo Jan 19 '11 at 19:43
Is Tarski using the axiom of choice? –  Andrés Caicedo Jan 19 '11 at 19:45

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

In modern notation, it says, "if $\kappa$ is a cardinal and $\kappa ^{< \kappa} = \kappa$, then $\kappa$ is strongly inaccessible." This isn't entirely true since the antecedent holds for $\kappa = \omega$ but $\omega$ isn't considered strongly inaccessible, but that's not a big deal. More importantly, under CH the antecedent will hold of $\aleph _1$ but $\aleph _1$ isn't a limit cardinal. So we need to add the assumptions that $\kappa$ is an uncountable limit cardinal. Given that, we can proceed:

So let's assume $\kappa ^{< \kappa} = \kappa$. First we show $\kappa$ is strong limit: $\kappa \leq 2^{< \kappa} \leq \kappa ^{< \kappa} = \kappa$. Next we show $\kappa$ is regular: Suppose not, then $\kappa ^{< \kappa} = \kappa < \kappa ^{ \mathrm{cf} ( \kappa) } \leq \kappa ^{< \kappa}$, contradiction.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you very much. This is the right answer for my very question ! Gérard Lang –  Gérard Lang Jan 19 '11 at 21:48

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.