Skip to main content
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

I asked the following on MSE a few weeks ago but I did not get any answer : http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1039593/carlsons-translatability-are-theses-characterisations-equivalenthttps://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1039593/carlsons-translatability-are-theses-characterisations-equivalent

Reference : "strong measure zero and strongly meager sets", Timothy Carlson (p.582).

Suppose $\kappa$ is a cardinal number and $\mathcal{U}$ is a set of subsets of a group $G$. $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable if for every $A$ in $\mathcal{U}$ there is a $B$ in $\mathcal{U}$ such that the union of any $\kappa$ many translates of $B$ is contained in a translate of $A$.

Here is what Carlson says :

Notice that if $\mathcal{U}$ is a filter then $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is a $B$ in the dual ideal such that the intersection of any $\kappa$ translates of $B$ contains a translate of $A$. Hence, $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is $B$ in the dual ideal such that the union of any $\kappa$ translates of $A$ is contained in a translate of $B$.

The second iff is not transparently clear to me...

I asked the following on MSE a few weeks ago but I did not get any answer : http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1039593/carlsons-translatability-are-theses-characterisations-equivalent

Reference : "strong measure zero and strongly meager sets", Timothy Carlson (p.582).

Suppose $\kappa$ is a cardinal number and $\mathcal{U}$ is a set of subsets of a group $G$. $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable if for every $A$ in $\mathcal{U}$ there is a $B$ in $\mathcal{U}$ such that the union of any $\kappa$ many translates of $B$ is contained in a translate of $A$.

Here is what Carlson says :

Notice that if $\mathcal{U}$ is a filter then $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is a $B$ in the dual ideal such that the intersection of any $\kappa$ translates of $B$ contains a translate of $A$. Hence, $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is $B$ in the dual ideal such that the union of any $\kappa$ translates of $A$ is contained in a translate of $B$.

The second iff is not transparently clear to me...

I asked the following on MSE a few weeks ago but I did not get any answer : https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1039593/carlsons-translatability-are-theses-characterisations-equivalent

Reference : "strong measure zero and strongly meager sets", Timothy Carlson (p.582).

Suppose $\kappa$ is a cardinal number and $\mathcal{U}$ is a set of subsets of a group $G$. $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable if for every $A$ in $\mathcal{U}$ there is a $B$ in $\mathcal{U}$ such that the union of any $\kappa$ many translates of $B$ is contained in a translate of $A$.

Here is what Carlson says :

Notice that if $\mathcal{U}$ is a filter then $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is a $B$ in the dual ideal such that the intersection of any $\kappa$ translates of $B$ contains a translate of $A$. Hence, $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is $B$ in the dual ideal such that the union of any $\kappa$ translates of $A$ is contained in a translate of $B$.

The second iff is not transparently clear to me...

edited title
Link

Carlson's translatability $\kappa$-translatability

deleted 673 characters in body
Source Link

I asked the following on MSE a few weeks ago but I did not get any answer : http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1039593/carlsons-translatability-are-theses-characterisations-equivalent

Given a translation-invariant ideal $\mathcal{I}$ on a commutative group $G$ and it's dual filter $\mathcal{I}^*$, why is $$ (\forall I \in \mathcal{I})(\exists I' \in \mathcal{I})(\forall g_1, g_2 \in G)(\exists h \in G)\bigg((I+g_1)\cup( I+g_2) \subseteq ( I' + h)\bigg)$$ equivalent to $$(\forall F \in \mathcal{I}^*)(\exists F' \in \mathcal{I}^*)(\forall g_1, g_2 \in G)(\exists h \in G)\bigg((F'+g_1)\cup( F'+g_2) \subseteq ( F + h)\bigg).$$

Reference : "strong measure zero and strongly meager sets", Timothy Carlson (p.582).

Edit

Suppose $\kappa$ is a cardinal number and $\mathcal{U}$ is a set of subsets of a group $G$. $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable if for every $A$ in $\mathcal{U}$ there is a $B$ in $\mathcal{U}$ such that the union of any $\kappa$ many translates of $B$ is contained in a translate of $A$.

Here is what Carlson says :

Notice that if $\mathcal{U}$ is a filter then $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is a $B$ in the dual ideal such that the intersection of any $\kappa$ translates of $B$ contains a translate of $A$. Hence, $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is $B$ in the dual ideal such that the union of any $\kappa$ translates of $A$ is contained in a translate of $B$.

The second iff is a bit obscur to me.

This result is used a two or three articles but none of them give more precision on why this result should be true. I might be splitting hair here, but Carlson's result is not transparently clear to me...

I asked the following on MSE a few weeks ago but I did not get any answer : http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1039593/carlsons-translatability-are-theses-characterisations-equivalent

Given a translation-invariant ideal $\mathcal{I}$ on a commutative group $G$ and it's dual filter $\mathcal{I}^*$, why is $$ (\forall I \in \mathcal{I})(\exists I' \in \mathcal{I})(\forall g_1, g_2 \in G)(\exists h \in G)\bigg((I+g_1)\cup( I+g_2) \subseteq ( I' + h)\bigg)$$ equivalent to $$(\forall F \in \mathcal{I}^*)(\exists F' \in \mathcal{I}^*)(\forall g_1, g_2 \in G)(\exists h \in G)\bigg((F'+g_1)\cup( F'+g_2) \subseteq ( F + h)\bigg).$$

Reference : "strong measure zero and strongly meager sets", Timothy Carlson (p.582).

Edit

Suppose $\kappa$ is a cardinal number and $\mathcal{U}$ is a set of subsets of a group $G$. $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable if for every $A$ in $\mathcal{U}$ there is a $B$ in $\mathcal{U}$ such that the union of any $\kappa$ many translates of $B$ is contained in a translate of $A$.

Here is what Carlson says :

Notice that if $\mathcal{U}$ is a filter then $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is a $B$ in the dual ideal such that the intersection of any $\kappa$ translates of $B$ contains a translate of $A$. Hence, $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is $B$ in the dual ideal such that the union of any $\kappa$ translates of $A$ is contained in a translate of $B$.

The second iff is a bit obscur to me.

This result is used a two or three articles but none of them give more precision on why this result should be true. I might be splitting hair here, but Carlson's result is not transparently clear to me.

I asked the following on MSE a few weeks ago but I did not get any answer : http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1039593/carlsons-translatability-are-theses-characterisations-equivalent

Reference : "strong measure zero and strongly meager sets", Timothy Carlson (p.582).

Suppose $\kappa$ is a cardinal number and $\mathcal{U}$ is a set of subsets of a group $G$. $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable if for every $A$ in $\mathcal{U}$ there is a $B$ in $\mathcal{U}$ such that the union of any $\kappa$ many translates of $B$ is contained in a translate of $A$.

Here is what Carlson says :

Notice that if $\mathcal{U}$ is a filter then $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is a $B$ in the dual ideal such that the intersection of any $\kappa$ translates of $B$ contains a translate of $A$. Hence, $\mathcal{U}$ is $\kappa$-translatable iff for every $A$ in the dual ideal there is $B$ in the dual ideal such that the union of any $\kappa$ translates of $A$ is contained in a translate of $B$.

The second iff is not transparently clear to me...

deleted 9 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 206 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 841 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 122 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
Source Link
Loading