9
$\begingroup$

In this question Subset of the plane that intersects every line exactly twice someone ask for a reference of a paper where they proof the result : ''There exist a subset of the plane that intersects each line exactly twice'' (called $2$-point sets [I think]).

I was talking with an students and we were wondering if, in the absence of Choice, this result is still true.

To make my question more precise, I know that we only need Choice to well order the reals and, I believe, you can make the set to be non-measureble but I'm not sure if it is non-measurable itself (I believe that using CH you can make a $2$-point set of measure zero [but, to be honest, I haven't work out the details]).

So, being more concrete, how much choice is need to create such a set? Are there models of ZF without them?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It seems that this is open whether or not such set can even be Borel, let alone $G_\delta$. In that case, I think you can probably construct one without appealing to the axiom of choice. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Dec 3 '15 at 23:14
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Arnie Miller showed that you don't need a well ordering of reals in the sense that there are ZF models with 2-point sets where the set of reals cannot be well ordered: math.wisc.edu/~miller/res/two-pt.pdf He also showed that in $L$, there are conanalytic 2-point sets which is the best known upper bound - An analytic 2-point set is necessarily Borel. Mauldin has results connecting this to geometric measure theory: math.unt.edu/~mauldin/papers/no100.pdf $\endgroup$ – Ashutosh Dec 4 '15 at 0:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ On measure and category: There is a 2-point set within $\{z \in \mathbb{R}^2 : |z| \in C\})$ where $C$ is any set of reals which, say, meets every interval on a perfect set . So there is always a meager null 2-point set. $\endgroup$ – Ashutosh Dec 4 '15 at 0:56
  • $\begingroup$ Great question! This one is closely related: mathoverflow.net/questions/272527/…. $\endgroup$ – Will Brian Feb 21 at 13:45
3
$\begingroup$

I wasn't aware of A. Miller's paper http://www.math.wisc.edu/~miller/res/two-pt.pdf up until recently. In Miller's model, DC (dependent choice) is false (there is a Dedekind finite infinite set). In a paper with M. Beriashvili I show that ZF plus DC plus the existence of a 2-point set does not imply that there is a well-ordering of the reals, see https://ivv5hpp.uni-muenster.de/u/rds/mazurkiewicz_sets.pdf or https://ivv5hpp.uni-muenster.de/u/rds/mazurkiewicz.pdf .

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think it's about time that you guys find the right general theorem for this (do contact me if you want to collaborate on this). It seems like a source of a lot of papers, and it seems to me that there is some bigger theorem in the background that you're just scratching instances of each and every time. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Feb 21 at 13:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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