15.08.2013 Views

Ω-Theory: Mathematics with Infinite and Infinitesimal Numbers - SELP

Ω-Theory: Mathematics with Infinite and Infinitesimal Numbers - SELP

Ω-Theory: Mathematics with Infinite and Infinitesimal Numbers - SELP

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

CHAPTER 1. Ω-CALCULUS<br />

Definition 1.10.4. If G has the FIP, then<br />

<br />

〈G〉 =<br />

is the filter generated by G.<br />

Y : ∃X1, . . . , Xk ∈ G so that Y ⊇<br />

The name “filter generated by G” is justified by the fact that 〈G〉 is indeed a<br />

filter, <strong>and</strong> it’s the smallest filter containing G. We won’t give the easy proof of this<br />

statement.<br />

Example 1.10.5. For all X ⊆ A, FX = {Y ⊆ A : Y ⊇ X} is a filter. The filters of<br />

the form FX <strong>with</strong> X ⊆ A are called principal filters. It’s clear that all the principal<br />

filters have the FIP.<br />

With the interpretation of Remark 1.10.2, a principal filter FX corresponds to<br />

the (principal) ideal generated by X.<br />

It’s important not to think all filters are principal. In fact there is one example<br />

of an important nonprincipal filter: the Frechet filter.<br />

Definition 1.10.6. The Frechet filter Fr(A) over a set A is the family of cofinite<br />

subsets of A:<br />

Fr(A) = {X ⊆ A : X c is finite}<br />

This filter will play an important role in the construction of models for Ω-<br />

Calculus.<br />

In analogy to the case of ideals, we can define filters that are maximal <strong>with</strong> respect<br />

to inclusion. This condition turns out to be equivalent to other two characterizations.<br />

Proposition 1.10.7. Let F be a filter over a set A. The following properties are<br />

equivalent:<br />

1. X ∈ F ⇒ X c ∈ F;<br />

2. k<br />

i=1 Xk ∈ F ⇒ ∃i : Xi ∈ F;<br />

3. F is a maximal filter on A <strong>with</strong> respect to inclusion.<br />

Proof. All the proofs are by reductio ad absurdum.<br />

To prove that condition 1 implies condition 2, suppose that condition 1 holds <strong>and</strong><br />

that k i=1 Xk ∈ F, but Xi ∈ F for all i = 1, . . . , k. Then, by hypothesis, Xc i ∈ F<br />

for all i = 1, . . . , k; <strong>and</strong> the same holds for the intersection<br />

k<br />

X c c k<br />

i =<br />

∈ F<br />

i=1<br />

i=1<br />

Since we are assuming that k<br />

i=1 Xk ∈ F, this is a contradiction: otherwise, we<br />

would deduce that ∅ ∈ F, <strong>and</strong> conclude that F is not a filter.<br />

Now, we will prove that condition 2 implies condition 3. If F was not maximal,<br />

then there would be a filter F ′ that properly includes it. Now, pick any X ∈ F ′ \ F:<br />

32<br />

Xk<br />

k<br />

i=1<br />

Xk

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!