Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · math/0212009

Topological diagonalizations and Hausdorff dimension

Tomasz Weiss·Boaz Tsaban
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Hausdorff dimension of a product XxY can be strictly greater than that of Y, even when the Hausdorff dimension of X is zero. But when X is countable, the Hausdorff dimensions of Y and XxY are the same. Diagonalizations of covers define a natural hierarchy of properties which are weaker than ``being countable'' and stronger than ``having Hausdorff dimension zero''. Fremlin asked whether it is enough for X to have the strongest property in this hierarchy (namely, being a gamma-set) in order to assure that the Hausdorff dimensions of Y and XxY are the same. We give a negative answer: Assuming CH, there exists a gamma-set of reals X and a set of reals Y with Hausdorff dimension zero, such that the Hausdorff dimension of X+Y (a Lipschitz image of XxY) is maximal, that is, 1. However, we show that for the notion of a_strong_ gamma-set the answer is positive. Some related problems remain open.

Explore related subjects

math.LOmath.CAmath.COmath.DSmath.GN

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tomasz Weiss, Boaz Tsaban. 2007-05-17. Topological diagonalizations and Hausdorff dimension. https://doi.org/10.1285/i15900932v22n2p83

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bluebirds and mockingbirds cannot produce a fixed-point combinator

Let $B$ be the bluebird combinator with reduction rule $Bxyz \to_{w} x\left(yz\right)$, let $M$ be the mockingbird combinator with reduction rule $Mx \to_{w} xx$, and let $I$ be the identity bird combinator with reduction rule $Ix \to_{w} x$. A fixed-point combinator, called a sage bird by Smullyan, is a closed term $Y$ such that, for a fresh variable $x$, $Yx$ is equivalent to $x\left(Yx\right)$ under these reduction rules. For a fixed variable $x$, we construct an invariant $\mathrm{Tr}_{x}\left(u\right)$ of a $BMI$-term $u$ with respect to $\to_{w}$. This invariant traces the occurrences of $x$ in the leftmost-innermost reduction sequence of $u$. We then prove that $\mathrm{Tr}_{x}\left(Yx\right) \neq \mathrm{Tr}_{x}\left(x^{r}\left( Yx \right)\right)$ for every $x$-free $BMI$-term $Y$ and every $r\geq 1$. Consequently, there exists no fixed-point combinator in $BMI$-combinatory logic. This provides a negative answer to the problem posed by Smullyan in 1985.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Pointwise provable equality and the failure of composition

Montagna (1989) and Di Paola--Montagna (1991) claim that the algebraic systems $S'$ and $S'_T$, respectively, are categories. We show that the proposed composition is not independent of the choice of representatives. For every consistent recursively enumerable extension $T$ of Peano arithmetic ($\mathrm{PA}$), we exhibit two program indices that are pointwise provably equal in $T$ but yield inequivalent composites when each is run after the same program. Montagna's $S'$ is the case $T=\mathrm{PA}$. The failure already occurs for partial maps from $ω$ to itself. Weak totality and the proposed range assignment also depend on the choice of representatives. More generally, for consistent $T\supseteq\mathrm{PA}$, pointwise provable equality is a composition congruence exactly when $T$ proves every true $Π^0_1$ sentence, in which case it is extensional equality. This completeness condition fails for every consistent recursively enumerable $T\supseteq\mathrm{PA}$ by Gödel's second incompleteness theorem. For every extension $T\supseteq\mathrm{PA}$, the least composition congruence containing pointwise provable equality is extensional equality if $T$ is $Σ^0_1$-sound and the universal relation otherwise.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Compactness via Consistency Properties

We will use consistency properties to characterize strongly compact cardinals, first showing an adequate Model Existence Theorem for larger fragments.

math.LO↗