7
$\begingroup$

Here's an easy lemma:

Any poset $(S, \preceq)$ is order-isomorphic to a subset of the powerset $\mathcal{P}(S)$ ordered by set-inclusion.

I seem to recall having seen this attributed to Dedekind.

Am I right that Dedekind proves this little result? And if so, where does he do it?

|improve this question
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm not quite sure about the relevance of this question to the history of mathematics. See this post I made $\endgroup$ – Danu♦ Nov 17 '14 at 21:32
3
$\begingroup$

I think that the source is Richard Dedekind's Was sind und was sollen die Zahlen ? (Vieweg: Braunschweig, 1888).

I quote from the English translation : THE NATURE AND MEANING OF NUMBERS, (The Open Court Publishing Co., 1901) :

98. Definition [page 37]. If $n$ is any number, then will we denote by $Z_n$ the system [set] of all numbers that are not greater than $n$ [...].

106. Theorem [page 38]. If $m < n$, then is $Z_m$ proper part of $Z_n$ and conversely.

I've found it through :

  • Gregory Moore, Zermelo's Axiom of Choice : Its Origin Development and Influence (1982), page 26.

We can easily generalise it to a poset $M$ whatever, defining the mapping :

$\pi : a \to M_a$, for any $a \in M.$

where $M_a = \{ x \in M : x \le a \}$

|improve this answer
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I suspect you are right that (106) in his truly great paper is the nearest Dedekind gets. But is that really enough to warrant attributing Dedekind the generalization to [what we now call] any poset? Perhaps not ...? $\endgroup$ – Peter Smith Nov 18 '14 at 20:08
  • $\begingroup$ @PeterSmith - I agree; with insight, it is very easy to "generalize" it --- now that we have one hundred years of development of set theory and abstract algebra (due also to Dedekind). $\endgroup$ – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Nov 18 '14 at 20:20

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.