The right choice?

An intuitionistic exploration of Zermelo’s Axiom

Dion Coumans

July 2008

Supervisor: dr. W.H.M. Veldman

Second reader: prof. dr. A.C.M. van Rooij

Faculty of Science
Radboud University Nijmegen

Student number: 0314099

Contents

List of Symbols 4

1 Introduction 5
1.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2 Prerequisites 9
2.1 Basic sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Special subsets of N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 Spreads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4 Brouwer’s Continuity Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.5 Axioms of Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6 Fans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.6.1 Fan Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.6.2 Unrestricted Fan Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.6.3 Extended Fan Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.7 The set of the real numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3 Discrete spreads and fans 25

3.1 Discrete spreads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.2 Discrete fans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4 On open, closed and enumerable subsets of N 31

4.1 All kinds of closed and open . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.2 Sequentially closed subsets of N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2.1 Finitely enumerable subsets of N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2.2 Enumerable subsets of N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

5 On the existence and non-existence of certain choice functions 46

5.1 Choice functions on collections of subsets of N . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.2 Choice functions on collections of subsets of C . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.2.1 Finitely enumerable subsets of C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.2.2 Sequentially closed subsets of C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.2.3 Effectively open subsets of C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

2
6 Sets of representatives for equivalence relations 56
6.1 Equivalence relations on N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2 The prisoners and their hats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
6.2.1 Equivalence relation on C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
6.2.2 Connection with the Vitali relation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.3 Equivalence relations and choice functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
6.3.1 Equivalence relation given by the inhabitedly enumerable
subsets of N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

7 Hamel basis 77
7.1 A Hamel independent function from C to R . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
7.2 A Hamel complete function from C to R? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
7.3 Connection with the Vitali relation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
7.3.1 Constructing weakly Vitali independent functions . . . . . 84
7.3.2 Weakly Vitali independence of g h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
7.3.3 Incompleteness of weakly Hamel independent functions . 89
7.4 Further research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

References 94

3
List of Symbols

AC0,0 First Axiom of Countable Choice, 15

CEα subset of N co-enumerated by α, 11
Dα subset of N decided by α, 11
Eα subset of N enumerated by α, 11
GAC1,0 First Axiom of Continuous Choice, 16
GAC1,1 Second Axiom of Continuous Choice, 16
GCP Brouwer’s Generalized Continuity Principle, 14
IEα subset of N inhabitedly enumerated by α, 47
S successor function, 42
αn subsequence of α, 14
# apartness relation
between real numbers and intervals, 69
on Baire space, 9
on the set of the real numbers, 23
≈ relation on the collection of intervals, 23
∗ concatenation function, 12
◦ composition function, 42
hi bijective function from N∗ to N, 12
N∗ set of all finite sequences of natural numbers, 12
C Cantor space, 13
N Baire space, 9
A closure of the set A, 36
αm initial segment of α of length m, 12
⊥ incompatibility relation, 42
∼
// a strongly not ∼a related, 64
∼a equivalence relation on C, 62
v ordering relation
on N∗ , 12
on the collection of intervals, 23
m infinite sequence with constant value m, 9
lg length function
on N∗ , 12
on the collection of intervals, 23

4
Chapter 1

Introduction

Imagine a queue of infinitely many prisoners numbered 0, 1, 2, . . .. Randomly,

each of them is assigned a black or a white hat. Each prisoner can only see the
hats of the fellow inmates in front of him (i.e. the hats of the inmates who have
a higher number than he has). The guard asks each prisoner in turn to guess
the colour of his hat, without the other prisoners being able to hear his reply.
If the prisoner answers correctly, he will be released. If not, he has to stay in
prison for the rest of his life.
After being given the rules of the game, the prisoners get one hour to determine
their strategy. One of them, a classical mathematician accepting the Axiom of
Choice, says ‘I have a plan that ensures at most finitely many of us guess
wrongly’.

The topic of this thesis is the Axiom of Choice, a statement which has led
to a huge amount of controversy and discussion since its formulation. The ex-
ample above is just one of the many peculiar consequences of the Axiom of
Choice. Banach and Tarksi explained, for example, how one, using the Axiom,
can cut a sphere into finitely many pieces that can be rearranged into two new
spheres that are both of the same size as the original one.

At first sight the Axiom of Choice sounds quite plausible, as it states:

for every set A, there exists a function f that assigns to every
(AC)
non-empty subset B of A an element f (B) of B.
We will refer to this statement as AC.
For instance, for the set A = {0, 1}, both
{0} 7→ 0, {1} 7→ 1, {0, 1} 7→ 0,
and
{0} 7→ 0, {1} 7→ 1, {0, 1} 7→ 1,
would do as such a function.
This is a very simple example. Notice, AC states ‘for every set’, which makes
it a strong statement, in particular if one has to deal with an infinite set A.

5
In this thesis we study the Axiom of Choice from Brouwer’s intuitionistic point
of view. There is much confusion about the role of the Axiom of Choice in
constructive mathematics. Some people seem to regard it as a non-constructive
principle, while others defend it from a constructive point of view. This confu-
sion is largely caused by the many different, classically equivalent, formulations
of the Axiom. At face value, some of these formulations seem plausible in a
constructive context, while others seem outright false.
We will show that some forms of the Axiom of Choice are acceptable to the
intuitionistic mathematician, while others are highly debatable.
Before giving a more detailed description of the content of this thesis, we briefly
sketch the origin and development of the Axiom of Choice. Some familiarity
with classical set theory is assumed, but such knowledge is not required for the
rest of this essay.

1.1 History
At the end of the 19th century, Georg Cantor claims that, for all sets X and Y ,
either X can be embedded into Y or Y can be embedded into X. In order to
prove this claim he introduces the Well-Ordering Principle, which states that
every set can be well-ordered. He proposes this principle as a ‘law of thought’,
a statement that, according to him, is obvious from the way one should think
about sets. Not everyone agrees.
In 1904, searching for a proof of the Well-Ordering Principle, Ernst Zermelo
introduces the Axiom of Choice.1 The formulation of AC by Zermelo makes
people aware of the numerous implicit uses of this proposition in earlier ar-
guments. It leads to vehement discussions: should one accept the Axiom of
Choice or shouldn’t one?
In 1908 Zermelo publishes an axiomatization of set theory. One of his aims is
to clarify the role and meaning of AC. Further study and debate leads to a list
of nine axioms and axiom schemes for set theory, called the ‘Axioms of Zermelo
and Fraenkel’, abbreviation ZF, which finds wide acceptance.
Due to the work of Fraenkel (1922), Gödel (1938), Mostowski (1945), and Co-
hen (1963) we now know that the Axiom of Choice is independent of ZF, that
is, if ZF is consistent then both ZF+AC and ZF+¬AC are consistent. Cohen
used a new method for his proof, called ‘forcing’, which turned out to be a very
fruitful method to obtain independence results [1].

1
The Axiom of Choice is in fact equivalent to the Well-Ordering Principle.

6
1.2 Overview
This thesis is written from an intuitionistic point of view. A basic introduction
to intuitionism is given in Chapter 2.
The statement AC does not make immediate sense to the intuitionistic math-
ematician. The concept ‘for every set’ is far too general and we prefer to first
consider some special sets A, like the set N of the natural numbers and Baire
space N , to see what becomes of AC in those cases.
Some forms of the Axiom of Choice are acceptable to us, as these follow from
the way we think about the objects of Baire space. We will explain and justify
those in Section 2.5 and we will use these forms in the rest of the thesis.
In the intuitionistic study of sets, the equality relation deserves special treat-
ment. On the set of the natural numbers, the equality relation is decidable,
but on Baire space it is not. We have tried to find a characterization of both
spreads and fans (two typically intuitionistic notions, explained in Chapter 2)
with a decidable equality. The result is presented in Chapter 3.

A second difficulty in AC is how to understand the phrase ‘every non-empty

subset of A’. Again, the notion of an arbitrary subset of a given set is too
general. In intuitionistic mathematics not all subsets are of the same kind. In
the example at the beginning, we have only defined the function for the de-
cidable subsets of {0, 1}. The statement becomes stronger if we consider the
enumerable subsets of A or an even broader notion of subset. We want it to be
clear which collection of (sub)sets we are working with, and therefore we start
from the classically equivalent statement:
S
for every family F of non-empty sets, there exists a function f : F → F
such that, for each S ∈ F, f (S) ∈ S.
Given a family F, a function satisfying the above condition is called a choice
function on F. Inspired by this formulation of the Axiom of Choice, we con-
sider various families of non-empty sets and ask whether one can define a choice
function on them. This is the topic of Chapter 5.
Before we go into the existence and non-existence of choice functions, we have
to gain a better insight into some of the families of sets we wish to consider,
in particular the collection of the closed subsets of N and the collection of the
open subsets of N . As we explain in Chapter 4, the intuitionistic mathemati-
cian has to distinguish between several definitions of the notions ‘open subset
of N ’ and ‘closed subset of N ’, which would be equivalent from a classical point
of view.

In classical mathematics, the Axiom of Choice has a large number of equiv-

alent formulations [2]. In the last chapters we study two of these and see what
becomes of them if we try to interpret them intuitionistically. In Chapter 6 we
start from the statement:
every equivalence relation has a set of representatives.
We try to find out if, for several kinds of equivalence relations on the natural
numbers, there exists a set of representatives and in what sense.

7
We also return to the problem of the prisoners and their hats formulated at the
beginning of this introduction and explain the classical strategy of the prisoner
that claims to be able to get most of them free. We will see that he uses the
‘fact’ that there exists a set of representatives for a certain equivalence relation
on Cantor space C. This equivalence relation appears to be connected with the
famous equivalence relation defined by Vitali on the set R of the real numbers
to construct a non-Lebesgue measurable subset of R. Considering the relation
on C from an intuitionistic point of view, we prove some theorems to the effect
that it fails to have an easily obtainable set of representatives.
In Chapter 7, we consider the following classical equivalent of AC:

every vector space has a basis.

We study R as a vectorspace over Q and investigate the existence of a basis

for R over Q, a so-called Hamel basis. We show that, as in classical set theory,
there is a close connection between Hamel bases and Vitali sets. Using this
connection we prove some positive results showing there is no easily obtainable
Hamel basis.

8
Chapter 2

Prerequisites

This chapter provides a short introduction to intuitionistic mathematics. Some

important basic concepts of intuitionism are explained and I hope that by going
through the examples the reader gets some feeling for a number of typically
intuitionistic principles. Definitions of more specific concepts used in this thesis
will be given along the way.

2.1 Basic sets

We study two basic sets. The first is N, the set of the natural numbers. N
has a so-called decidable equality. This means we can decide for all m, n in N
whether m = n or m 6= n.
This is not so for the second fundamental set, N , the collection of all infinite
sequences of natural numbers, or, one could say, the collection of all functions
from N to N. N is called Baire space. The elements of N are thought of as
being constructed step by step. One defines an element α of N by giving, one
by one, its values α(0), α(1), α(2), . . .. Such a sequence may be given by an
explicit algorithm (for example ‘pick 0 in each step’), but, even then, it might
be imagined to be the result of choosing randomly in each step.
Definition 2.1. For each m ∈ N, we define an element m of N by
m(n) = m for all n in N.
d

For example, 0 is the sequence consisting of only zeros.

For α, β ∈ N , we define
α = β  ∀n [ α(n) = β(n) ].
Saying ¬ (α = β) is saying that the assumption ∀n [ α(n) = β(n) ] leads to
a contradiction. This is quite weak. We only know that α and β are not
everywhere the same, but we may not be able to indicate a place where they
differ. Therefore, we also define a stronger relation on N .
Definition 2.2. We say: α is apart from β, notation α # β, if and only if there
exists n ∈ N such that α(n) 6= β(n).

9
In intuitionistic mathematics the phrase ‘there exists’ is interpreted in a con-
structive way. That is, for any property A of natural numbers, the statement
∃n ∈ N [ A(n) ] means that we are able to explicitly find a natural number n 0
satisfying A(n0 ).

We cannot decide for each α, β ∈ N ,

α = β ∨ α # β.

Let us first explain how we, following Brouwer, interpret the logical symbol ∨.
For any two mathematical statements A and B, A ∨ B means that we can pick
one of the two statements (A or B) and give a proof of this statement.
Now consider for instance α ∈ N defined by:

α(n) = 0 if there is no block of 99 nines in the first n digits

d
of the decimal expansion of π,
=1 if there is a block of 99 nines in the first n digits of
d
the decimal expansion of π.

Note that

∀n [ α(n) = 0 ]  there is no block of 99 nines in the decimal expansion of π,

and

∃n [ α(n) 6= 0 ]  there is a block of 99 nines in the decimal expansion of π.

As, at this moment, we do not know whether or not there exists a block of 99
nines in the decimal expansion of π, we cannot prove α = 0, nor α # 0. Hence
we cannot decide α = 0 ∨ α # 0.

We will use the example of the 99 nines in the decimal expansion of π more of-
ten, and therefore, we introduce some abbreviations. For each natural number
n we define
n < k99 = there is no block of 99 nines in the first n digits of the decimal
d
expansion of π.
n = k99 = n is the first position in the decimal expansion of π where a block
d
of 99 nines is completed.
n > k99 = there is a block of 99 nines in the first n − 1 digits of the decimal
d
expansion of π.
Note that we do not give a definition of k 99 on its own. Nevertheless, we
will occasionally talk about k99 as if it exists in its own right. We could, for
example, say ‘k99 exists’, when we mean: ∃n [ n = k99 ].

10
2.2 Special subsets of N
Let A be a subset of N and n a natural number. We cannot decide in general
n∈A ∨ n∈
/ A. (2.1)
One could define, for example,
A = {n ∈ N | n = 0 ∧ the Riemann Hypothesis}.
d

As we can neither prove nor reject the Riemann Hypothesis (at this moment),
we cannot decide 0 ∈ A ∨ 0 ∈ / A.
A subset A of N for which we are able to decide (2.1) for all natural numbers
n is called a decidable subset of N. In fact, we will use the following definition
of the notion ‘decidable subset of N’, which is slightly stronger.
Definition 2.3. For any α ∈ N , we define:
Dα = {n ∈ N | α(n) = 1}.
d

Let X ⊆ N.
We say that α decides X if and only if X coincides with D α .
X is a decidable subset of N if and only if some α ∈ N decides X.
Two other special collections of subsets of N are the collection of the enumerable
subsets of N and the collection of the co-enumerable subsets of N. These are
defined as follows.
Definition 2.4. For any α ∈ N , we define:
Eα = {n ∈ N | ∃k ∈ N [ n = α(k) − 1 ]},
d
CEα = N \ Eα = {n ∈ N | ¬(n ∈ Eα ) }.
d

Let X ⊆ N.
We say that α enumerates (resp. co-enumerates) X if and only if X coincides
with Eα (CEα ).
X is a enumerable subset (resp. co-enumerable subset) of N if and only if some
α ∈ N enumerates (co-enumerates) X.
Not every enumerable subset of N is decidable. For instance, the set
A = {n ∈ N | n = 1 ∧ k99 exists}
d

is not decidable. As we do not know whether or not there exists a block of

99 nines in the decimal expansion of π, we are not able to decide whether the
natural number 1 is in A or not.
A is enumerable for we can define α ∈ N by
α(k) = 0 if k < k99 ,
d
=2 if k ≥ k99 .
d

Then A = Eα .
We will say some more about this topic in Section 6.3.1.

11
2.3 Spreads
A typical intuitionistic concept is the notion of a spread. In order to define
spreads we first introduce some other concepts. To start with, N ∗ is the set of all
finite sequences of natural numbers. We define a bijective function h i : N ∗ → N
by defining, for all k ∈ N, for all s0 , . . . , sk−1 ∈ N,
s s +1
hs0 , . . . , sk−1 i = ps00 · . . . · pk−2
k−2 k−1
· pk−1 −1 (2.2)
d

where pn is the nth prime number and by definition the empty product is 1
(whence h i = 1 − 1 = 0).
Using this function, we may view N∗ and N as the same set.
We define a function lg : N∗ → N by

lg( hs0 , . . . , sk−1 i ) = k.

d

We also define, for each finite sequence s and all i < lg(s),

hs0 , . . . , sk−1 i(i) = si .

d

We define two concatenation functions, both denoted by ∗. The first one is

between finite sequences and the second one is between finite sequences and
infinite sequences.
Definition 2.5. Let α ∈ N and r, s ∈ N∗ , say r = hr0 , . . . rm i, s = hs0 , . . . , sn i.

r ∗ s = hr0 , . . . , rm , s0 , . . . , sn i,
d
r ∗ α = (r0 , . . . , rm , α(0), α(1), α(2), . . .).
d

The collection of all finite sequences of natural numbers may be ordered as

follows.
Definition 2.6. Let a, b ∈ N∗ .
We say a extends to b, notation a v b, if and only if

∃c ∈ N∗ [ b = a ∗ c ].

We say a is a proper initial segment of b, notation a @ b, if and only if

a v b ∧ a 6= b.

Definition 2.7. For all α ∈ N , for all m ∈ N,

α(m) = hα(0), . . . , α(m − 1)i.

d

In case there is no confusion possible, we leave out the parentheses and write
αm. We call αm an initial segment of α.

Similary, for all s ∈ N∗ , for all m ≤ lg(s),

s(m) = h s(0), . . . , s(m − 1) i.

d

12
Now we are ready to define the notion of a spread.

Definition 2.8. Let σ : N∗ → {0, 1}.

We say σ is a spread law if and only if:

(L1) σ( h i ) = 0,

(L2) for all s ∈ N∗ , σ(s) = 0  ∃n [ σ(s ∗ h n i) = 0 ].

For all α ∈ N , we say: α is admitted by σ, notation α ∈ σ, if and only if for all

n ∈ N, σ(αn) = 0. The set of all sequences that are admitted by a spread law
σ is called a spread. We write σ for both the spread and the spread law.

One can think of N as a tree with the finite sequences of natural numbers as
nodes. In this tree there is a path from the finite sequence a to the finite se-
quence b if and only if a extends to b. The elements of N are all the infinite
paths one may construct by going upwards in this tree.
For a given spread σ, the spread law tells you, in each node, which branches
you can walk if you want to construct an infinite sequence that is an element
of σ. Due to property L2 there are no dead ends. Property L1 guarantees that
σ contains at least one element.

Cantor space, C, is the collection of all infinite sequences of natural numbers

assuming no other values than zero and one. This is a spread, as we can define
the appropriate spread law σ by:

σ(s) = 0  ∀i < lg(s) [ s(i) = 0 ∨ s(i) = 1 ]

2.4 Brouwer’s Continuity Principle

Let R ⊆ N × N be a relation such that, for all α in N , we can find a natural
number n satisfying R(α, n). Then Brouwer’s Continuity Principle (CP) states
that, for all α in N , we can already determine a natural number n satisfying
R(α, n) after knowing only a finite part of α, i.e.

∀α ∈ N ∃m ∈ N ∃n ∈ N ∀β ∈ N [ αm = βm → R(β, n) ]

This might sound improbable at first, but recall how we view elements of Baire
space. Every infinite sequence of natural numbers may be thought of as being
constructed step by step. If you state

∀α ∈ N ∃n ∈ N [ R(α, n) ],

you claim that if someone (let us call that person your opponent) gives you
an element α of N by giving you one by one its values α(0), α(1), α(2), . . ., at
some point you are able to come up with a natural number n such that R(α, n).
Suppose you do so after your opponent has given the first 100 values of α. Then
for any β that agrees on the first 100 positions with α (i.e. α100 = β100), also
R(β, n), as you do not yet know anything about the future values of α.

13
In Section 2.1 we have constructed a sequence α for which the statement
α = 0 ∨ α # 0 is reckless. Using the Continuity Principle one can obtain
a contradiction from the assumption ∀α, β ∈ N [ α = β ∨ α # β ]. First note
that we can code a sequence of elements α 0 , α1 , . . . of N by just one element α
of N . To do so we use the map h i defined at (2.2) on page 12.
Definition 2.9. Let α ∈ N .
For each n ∈ N, we define αn ∈ N by, for all m ∈ N,
αn (m) = α(h n, m i).
d
Now suppose
∀α, β ∈ N [ α = β ∨ α # β ]. (2.3)
Define R ⊆ N × N by
R(α, 0)  α 0 = α1 R(α, 1)  α 0 # α1 .
By (2.3), in particular ∀α ∈ N [ α0 = α1 ∨ α0 # α1 ], so
∀α ∈ N ∃n ∈ N [ R(α, n) ].
Applying the Continuity Principle yields:
∀α ∈ N ∃m ∈ N ∃n ∈ N ∀β ∈ N [ αm = βm → R(β, n) ]. (2.4)
Note that 00
=0= 01 ,
so R(0, 0) and not R(0, 1).
Hence, by applying (2.4) for α = 0, we can determine m ∈ N such that:
∀β ∈ N [ 0m = βm → R(β, 0) ]. (2.5)
Define β ∈ N by
β(n) = 0 if n 6= h1, mi,
d
=1 if n = h1, mi.
d

Then, as h1, mi > m, βm = 0m. Hence, by (2.5), R(β, 0).

But β 0 = 0 6= β 1 . Contradiction.
So, using the Continuity Principle, we have proven
¬∀α, β ∈ N [ α = β ∨ α # β ].

In Section 2.3 we have introduced spreads. The argument given to justify the
Continuity Principle for N can be applied to any spread.
Definition 2.10. Brouwer’s Generalized Continuity Principle (GCP).
Let σ ⊆ N be a spread and R ⊆ σ × N.
If, for all α in σ, there exists a natural number n satisfying R(α, n), then
∀α ∈ σ ∃m ∈ N ∃n ∈ N ∀β ∈ σ [ αm = βm → R(β, n) ].
The (Generalized) Continuity Principle is a powerful tool. Using GCP one can
for example prove that every real function is continuous (the definition of the
real numbers will be given in Section 2.7). The Continuity Principle will play
an important role in many proofs in this thesis.

14
2.5 Axioms of Choice
In this thesis we will investigate what becomes of the various forms and equiva-
lents of the Axiom of Choice if we try to interpret them intuitionistically. Some
forms of the Axiom of Choice are acceptable for the intuitionistic mathemati-
cian, as these follow from the way we think about elements of Baire space. The
first of these is the First Axiom of Countable Choice

Definition 2.11. First Axiom of Countable Choice (AC 0,0 )

Let P ⊆ N × N such that, for each natural number n, we can find at least one
m in N with P (n, m). Then there exists α ∈ N such that ∀n ∈ N [ P (n, α(n)) ].

In classical set theory AC0,0 is a theorem (i.e. a statement one can prove from
ZF, the usual axiom system for set theory without the Axiom of Choice), as
one may define a function f : N → N, by

f (n) = µm [ P (n, m) ].
d

Intuitionistically, this formula does not define an element of N , as we may not

be able to decide, for a given n, which m ∈ N is the smallest natural number
satisfying P (n, m).
However, AC0,0 is accepted as an axiom, because it follows from the way we
view N . The elements of N are defined step by step. Hence for any subset P
of N × N with

∀m ∈ N ∃n ∈ N [ P (m, n) ],

we can define an element α as follows: in step n find m ∈ N with P (n, m) and

define α(n) = m. This α satisfies the requirement.
d

The First Axiom of Countable Choice is about relations on N. The next choice
axiom we consider is about relations between N and N. Before we can formu-
late this axiom we need to be clear on what we mean by ‘a function from N to
N’. We immediately define a more general notion, namely the one of ‘a function
from a spread to the natural numbers’.

Definition 2.12. Let γ, α ∈ N . We define

γ : α 7→ n = γ assigns to α the natural number n,

d
= ∃k ∈ N [ γ(αk) = n + 1 ∧ ∀m ∈ N [ m 6= k → γ(αm) = 0 ] ].
d

For any spread σ and any γ ∈ N we define

γ : σ → N = γ defines a function from σ to N,

d
= ∀α ∈ σ ∃n ∈ N [ γ : α 7→ n ].
d

For all α ∈ σ, we write γ(α) for the unique natural number n such that γ : α 7→
n.

15
Why does it make sense to define functions from a spread σ to N like this?
Well, such a function sends each element of σ to a natural number. If someone
is building an element of the spread by giving its values step by step, at some
point the function should be able to supply the image of this sequence. This is
exactly what happens with the γ defined above. For any α ∈ N , for all m ∈ N,
as long as the initial segment αm of α does not give enough information to
determine the image of α, γ(αm) = 0. However, at some point we know what
the image of α is, say after knowing the first k values of α we know its image
is n. Then γ(αk) = n + 1.

Now we are ready to define the next choice axiom, the First Axiom of Con-
tinuous Choice.

Definition 2.13. First Axiom of Continuous Choice (GAC 1,0 )

Let σ be a spread and R ⊆ σ × N such that, for all α ∈ σ, there exists n ∈ N
with R(α, n). Then there exists a function γ : σ → N, such that, for all α ∈ N ,
R(α, γ(α)).

This axiom may be defended as follows. Let σ be a spread and R ⊆ σ × N

such that ∀α ∈ σ ∃n ∈ N [ R(α, n) ]. We define γ ∈ N step by step. For each
a ∈ N decide whether a gives enough information to find n ∈ N with R(α, n)
for a sequence α starting with (the finite sequence coded by) a. If this is the
case and there is no b ∈ N with b @ a and γ(b) 6= 0, we define γ(a) = n + 1.
d
Otherwise, γ(a) = 0. One may convince oneself that γ is a function from σ to
d
N and, for all α ∈ σ, R(α, γ(α)).

The last choice axiom we introduce is about relations on N . We first define

what we mean by ‘a function from a spread to N ’.

Definition 2.14. Let α, β, γ ∈ N . We define:

γ : α 7→ β = γ assigns to α the sequence β,

d
= ∀n ∈ N [ γ n : α 7→ β(n) ].
d

For any spread σ and γ ∈ N we define:

γ : σ → N = γ defines a function from σ to N ,

d
= ∀α ∈ σ ∃β ∈ N [ γ : α 7→ β ].
d

For all α ∈ σ, we write γ|α for the unique sequence β such that γ : α 7→ β.

Definition 2.15. Second Axiom of Continuous Choice (GAC 1,1 )

Let σ be a spread and R ⊆ σ × N such that, for all α ∈ σ, there exists β ∈ N
with R(α, β). Then there exists a function γ : σ → N such that, for all α ∈ N ,
R(α, γ|α).

16
It takes a bit more effort to defend this axiom. For the justification of this axiom
and a thorough explanation of all choice axioms introduced in this section the
reader is referred to [4].
GAC1,1 is the strongest axiom we have introduced in this section. Both AC 0,0
and GAC1,0 are a consequence of GAC1,1 .

2.6 Fans
We have seen two examples of spreads up to now: N and C. There is an
important difference between these two spreads. When constructing an element
of N you have infinitely many possible choices at each step (you can pick any
natural number). On the other hand, you only have two options (zero and one)
for each position when you are constructing an element of C. A spread in which
you only have finitely many possible choices in each step is called a fan. A
precise definition of the notion of a fan is the following.

Definition 2.16. Let σ : N∗ → {0, 1}.

We say σ is a fan law if and only if σ is a spread law, i.e. σ satisfies:

(L1) σ( h i ) = 0,

(L2) for all s ∈ N∗ , σ(s) = 0  ∃n [ σ(s ∗ h n i) = 0 ],

and in addition,

(L3) for all s ∈ N∗ , σ(s) = 0 → ∃k ∈ N ∀n ∈ N [ σ(s ∗ hni) = 0 → n < k ].

For any fan law σ the set

{α ∈ N | ∀n ∈ N [ σ(αn) = 0 ]},

i.e. the set of all infinite sequences that are admitted by σ, is called a fan.

One may view a fan as a tree, where in each node there are finitely many
(but never zero) branches going up. The elements of a fan are constructed by
walking up the tree and in each node picking one of the finitely many possible
branches to a following node.

2.6.1 Fan Theorem

The Fan Theorem is a powerful tool used in intuitionistic mathematics. Brouwer
used this theorem to prove that every real-valued (continuous) function defined
on a closed interval is uniformly continuous. First we introduce the notion of a
‘bar’.

Definition 2.17. Let σ be a fan and B a subset of N ∗ .

We call B a bar in σ if and only if every α in σ has an initial segment αn
belonging to B.

17
The Fan Theorem says

every decidable bar has a finite subbar.

What do we mean by this? Let σ be a fan and B a decidable subset of N ∗

that is a bar in σ. Then the Fan Theorem states we can find a finite subset B 0
of B, such that B 0 is a bar in σ. One may formulate the Fan Theorem in the
following equivalent way as well.

Definition 2.18. Fan Theorem

For every fan σ and for every decidable subset B of N ∗ that is a bar in σ,
there exists a natural number M such that, for all α ∈ σ, there exists a natural
number n ≤ M with αn ∈ B.

Classically, the Fan Theorem is equivalent to its contraposition, which is known

as König’s Lemma:

every infinite finitely branching tree has an infinite path.

There are some expressions in the statement above that perhaps have to be
explained. So let us start with that.

Definition 2.19. Let T ⊆ N∗ .

T is a tree if and only if for all s ∈ N∗ , for all n ∈ N, if s ∗ hni belongs to T ,
then s belongs to T .
A tree T is finitely-branching if and only if for all elements s of T , there are
only finitely many natural numbers n with s ∗ hni ∈ T .
A tree T is infinite if and only if for all n ∈ N, there exists s ∈ T with lg(s) = n.
An element α of N is an infinite path of T if and only if for all n ∈ N, αn ∈ T .

The classical mathematican may prove König’s Lemma as follows. Let T be

an infinite finitely-branching tree. The classical mathematician now constructs
an infinite path α of T step by step. In the first step he notes that T is
finitely-branching, hence there are only finitely many n ∈ N with hni ∈ T , say
n0 , . . . , nk . As any element of T starts with either n 0 or n1 or . . . or nk and T
is infinite, at least for one of the ni the set

Ai = {s ∈ N∗ | s(0) = ni }
d

is infinite. α(0) is defined as the smallest such n i . Continuing this way, the
classical mathematician defines, for each n ∈ N,

α(n) = µk [ {s ∈ T | αn ∗ hki v s} is infinite ]

d

He proves by induction that such k exists for each n, hence α is a well-defined

infinite path in T . So classically König’s Lemma holds and thereby also the
Fan Theorem holds.
This proof of König’s Lemma is not acceptable for the intuitionistic mathe-
matician. Have another look at how α(0) is defined. Although the union of
the sets A0 , . . . , Ak is infinite, we may not be able to decide which of the sets

18
is infinite. We only know that they are not all finite. The same problem arises
when defining α(1), α(2), . . ..
Having seen this, we need not be suprised that König’s Lemma does not hold
intuitionistically. One could define a tree T by
s∈T  ∃n ∈ N [ s = 0n ∧ (n < k99 ∨ (n ≥ k99 ∧ k99 is even) ] ∨
∃n ∈ N [ s = 1n ∧ (n < k99 ∨ (n ≥ k99 ∧ k99 is odd) ].
Then T is an infinite finitely-branching tree, but it is reckless to say T has an
infinite path. For suppose T has an infinite path, say α. Then
α(0) = 0  ∀n ∈ N [ n = k99 → n is even ],
α(0) = 1  ∀n ∈ N [ n = k99 → n is odd ].
As we are able to decide whether α(0) = 0 or α(0) = 1, it follows from the
equivalencies above that we can decide
∀n ∈ N [ n = k99 → n is even ] ∨ ∀n ∈ N [ n = k99 → n is odd ].
But this is reckless.

Brouwer proved the Fan Theorem using his Principle of Bar Induction. For
a full explanation of his argument the reader could consult [3] or [4].

2.6.2 Unrestricted Fan Theorem

Up to now we have only spoken about decidable bars. Leaving out the adjective
‘decidable’ in the formulation of the Fan Theorem gives us a more general form
of this theorem. Note that this does not change anything for the classical
mathematician. He assumes the law of excluded middle by which every bar is
automatically a decidable bar.
Definition 2.20. Unrestricted Fan Theorem
Let σ be a fan and let B ⊆ N∗ be a bar in σ. Then we can find N ∈ N such
that ∀α ∈ σ ∃n ∈ N [ n ≤ N ∧ (α, n) ∈ B ].
Theorem 2.21. Assuming GAC1,0 , the Unrestricted Fan Theorem can be de-
rived from the Fan Theorem.
Proof. Let σ be a fan and B ⊆ N∗ a bar in σ.
We will show that B has a finite subbar B 0 .
As B is a bar in σ,
∀α ∈ σ ∃n ∈ N [ αn ∈ B ].
So, by GAC1,0 , there exists a function γ : σ → N such that:
∀α ∈ σ [ α(γ(α)) ∈ B ].
Define of subset C of N∗ by
C = {s ∈ N∗ | γ(s) 6= 0}.
d

19
First note that C is a bar in σ.

Let α ∈ σ.
γ : σ → N, so by definition there exists n ∈ N with γ(αn) 6= 0.
So ∀α ∈ σ ∃n ∈ N [ αn ∈ C ].

C is a decidable subset of N∗ . Applying the Fan Theorem yields that C has a

finite subbar C 0 , say C 0 = {s0 , . . . , sn }.

The idea for the definition of B 0 is the following:

For 0 ≤ i ≤ n:
Consider γ(si ) and distinguish two cases:

1. γ(si ) − 1 ≤ lg(si ).
Make sure si (γ(si ) − 1) is in B 0 .
2. γ(si ) − 1 > lg(si ).
Make sure all finite sequences of length γ(s i )−1 that start with
si and are in σ are in B 0 .

To accomplish this we define B 0 ⊆ N∗ by:

s ∈ B0  ∃i ≤ n [ si (γ(si ) − 1) = s ] ∨
∃i ≤ n [ si v s ∧ lg(s) = γ(si ) − 1 ∧ σ(s) = 0 ].

Note that B 0 is a decidable subset of N∗ .

We will prove that B 0 is a finite subbar of B.

• B0 ⊆ B
Let s ∈ B 0 .
It follows from the definition of B 0 that there are two possibilities:

1. ∃i ≤ n [ si (γ(si ) − 1) = s ].
By definition of γ this yields s ∈ B.
2. ∃i ≤ n [ si v s ∧ lg(s) = γ(si ) − 1 ∧ σ(s) = 0 ].
Define α ∈ N by

α(n) = s(n) if n < lg(s),

d
= µi [ σ(αn ∗ hii) = 0 ] if n ≥ lg(s).
d

α ∈ σ, so

α(γ(α)) ∈ B. (2.6)

As si v s = α(lg(s)) and γ(si ) 6= 0,

γ(α) = γ(si ) − 1. (2.7)

20
 Combining (2.6) and (2.7) we conclude,

α(γ(si ) − 1) ∈ B.

As γ(si ) − 1 = lg(s),

s = α(lg(s)) = α(γ(si ) − 1) ∈ B.

So B 0 ⊆ B.

• B 0 is a bar in σ.
Let α ∈ σ.
Determine i ∈ N such that α(lg(si )) = si (C 0 is a bar in σ).
Then α(γ(si ) − 1) ∈ B 0 .

• B 0 is finite.
For every 0 ≤ i ≤ n there are two possibilities:

1. γ(si ) − 1 ≤ lg(si )
si causes the addition of one extra element to B 0 .

2. γ(si ) − 1 > lg(si )

σ is a fan, so for each t ∈ N∗ with σ(t) = 0 there are only finitely
many natural numbers k such that σ(t ∗ hki) = 0.
So there are only finitely many t ∈ σ of length γ(s i ) − 1 that start
with si .

Any element in B 0 is in there because of either reason 1 or 2. So B 0 only

has finitely many elements.

Hence B 0 is a finite subbar of B, as required. 

2.6.3 Extended Fan Theorem

We often use an extension of the Fan Theorem which states: if, for every element
in a certain fan, we can find a natural number with a desired property, then we
can find N ∈ N such that, for each element of the fan, we can find a natural
number with the desired property below N .

Definition 2.22. Extended Fan Theorem

Let σ be a fan and R ⊆ σ × N such that for each α ∈ σ there exists n ∈ N such
that R(α, n). Then we can find N ∈ N such that ∀α ∈ σ ∃n ≤ N [ R(α, n) ].

Theorem 2.23. Assuming GAC1,0 , the Extended Fan Theorem can be derived
from the Fan Theorem.

Proof. Let σ be a fan and R ⊆ σ × N with the property

∀α ∈ σ ∃n ∈ N [ R(α, n) ].

21
By GAC1,0 , there exists a function γ : σ → N satisfying

∀α ∈ σ [ R(α, γ(α)) ].

Define a subset B of N∗ by, for all s ∈ N∗ ,

s∈B  γ(s) 6= 0.

B is decidable and, as γ is a function on σ, B is a bar in σ. So we can apply

the Fan Theorem and find M ∈ N such that

∀α ∈ σ ∃n ≤ M [ γ(αn) 6= 0 ].

Define N = max( { γ(s) | lg(s) ≤ M } ). Then

d

∀α ∈ σ ∃n ≤ N [ R(α, n) ],

as required. 

The Extended Fan Theorem is much stronger than the Fan Theorem and, in
contrast to the Unrestricted Fan Theorem, it does not hold classically. One
could define for example R ⊆ C × N by, for all α ∈ C, for all n ∈ N,

R(α, n)  (α = 0 ∧ n = 0) ∨ α(n) 6= 0.

The classical mathematician would say this relation satisfies:

∀α ∈ C ∃n ∈ N [ R(α, n) ]. (2.8)

To him, any element α of C is either equal to 0 (in which case R(α, 0)) or is not
equal to 0 (in that case he is convinced there exists a position n with α(n) 6= 0).
Clearly there is no natural number N , such that for all α in C we can find n ≤ N
with R(α, n). Hence the Extended Fan Theorem does not hold classically.
The intuitionistic mathematician does not agree with (2.8), however. Hence the
relation R does not satisfy the requirements of the Extended Fan Theorem.

2.7 The set of the real numbers

Starting from the two basic structures we have introduced, N and N , we want
to construct more complex structures. To begin with, we define the integers by
Z = (N × N)/ ∼0 , where ∼0 is the equivalence relation:
d

hm, ni ∼0 hp, qi  m + q = n + p.

Addition, multiplication and order on Z are defined as usual.

The rational numbers are defined by Q = (Z × N>0 )/(∼1 ), where ∼1 is the
d
equivalence relation:

hm, ni ∼1 hp, qi  m · q = n · p.

22
Addition, multiplication and order on Q are defined as usual.
Note that the equality on both Z and Q is decidable.

To define the real numbers we first introduce the set S of all (code numbers of)
rational intervals. Let ρ be a bijective map from N to Q. We say m ∈ N codes
a rational interval if and only if there exist m 0 , m1 ∈ N such that

1. m = hm0 , m1 i,

2. ρ (m0 ) ≤ ρ (m1 ).

For each m = hm0 , m1 i in S we define

m0 = ρ(m0 ) and m00 = ρ(m1 ),

d d
00 0
lg(m) = m − m .
d

So m0 and m00 are the left and the right endpoint of the interval coded by m
and lg(m) is the length of the interval coded by m.
For rational numbers p, q, we will usually just write [p, q] for the rational inter-
val hρ−1 (p), ρ−1 (q)i.

For all a, b ∈ S we define

a v b = b0 ≤ a0 ≤ a00 ≤ b00 (a is contained in b),

d
a ≈ b = a0 ≤ b00 ∧ b0 ≤ a00 (a touches b).
d

Notice we also defined a function lg and a relation v on the collection of finite

sequences of natural numbers. By stating which collection we are working with
it will be clear which notion we mean.

Definition 2.24. Let x ∈ N .

We say x is a real number, i.e. x ∈ R, if and only if x is a shrinking and
shriveling sequence of rational intervals. That is,
(i). for all n ∈ N, x(n) ∈ S,
(ii). for all n ∈ N, x(n + 1) v x(n) (shrinking)
(iii). for all n ∈ N, there exists m in N such that lg(x(n)) ≤ 2 −m (shriveling)

For all x, y ∈ R, we define

x ≡ y = ∀n ∈ N [ x(n) ≈ y(n) ],
d
x # y = ∃n ∈ N [¬ ( x(n) ≈ y(n)) ],
d

x < y = ∃n ∈ N [ x(n)00 < y(n)0 , ],

d
x ≤ y = ∀n ∈ N [ x(n)0 ≤ y(n)00 ].
d

23
Note that equality on the reals is not decidable. We could, for example, define
a real number ψ by

ψ(n) = [− n1 , n1 ] if n ≤ k99 ,
d
= [ k1 , k1 ] if k = k99 and k ≤ n.
d

As one can show

ψ≡0  k99 exists,

ψ#0  k99 does not exist,

we cannot decide ψ ≡ 0 ∨ ψ # 0.

Far more can be said about the construction of the real numbers, but as this is
not of particular importance for this thesis we do not go into this subject any
further.

24
Chapter 3

Discrete spreads and fans

In the previous chapter we have seen that equality on N is not decidable.

One could, however, study subsets of N that do have a decidable equality, i.e.
subsets A of N with

∀α, β ∈ A [ α = β ∨ α # β ]. (3.1)

A subset A of N satisfying (3.1) is called discrete.

In this chapter we study discrete spreads and fans. We will see that these
can be characterized in a surprising and nice way. The characterization of dis-
crete fans leads us to an equivalent of the Fan Theorem, which we prove in the
last section of this chapter.

3.1 Discrete spreads

In section 2.3 we have introduced spreads. When working with spreads we have
a powerful tool, the (Generalized) Continuity Principle (Definition 2.10). Using
GCP we will show that a spread is discrete if and only if it is enumerable.

Definition 3.1. Let A ⊆ N .

A is enumerable iff there exist α0 , α1 , . . . in N such that A = {α0 , α1 , . . .}.

We start with a lemma and show: for all α and β in a discrete spread, we can
already decide whether α = β or α # β after knowing finitely many values of
α and β.

Lemma 3.2. Let σ be a discrete spread. Then

∀α ∈ σ ∃m ∈ N ∀β ∈ σ [ αm = βm → α = β ].

Proof. Let σ be a discrete spread.

We define for each α ∈ N

αodd = (α(1), α(3), α(5), . . .) αeven = (α(0), α(2), α(4), . . .).

d d

25
Similarly, sodd and seven are defined for s ∈ N∗ .

Define a spread law τ by, for all s ∈ N∗ ,

τ (s) = 0  σ(sodd ) = σ(seven ) = 0.

As, for all γ ∈ τ , both γodd and γeven are in the discrete spread σ,

∀γ ∈ τ [ γodd = γeven ∨ γodd # γeven ]. (3.2)

Define a relation R ⊆ τ × N by

γ R 0  γodd = γeven , γ R 1  γodd # γeven .

Then, by (3.2), for all γ in τ , γ R 0 or γ R 1. So using GCP,

∀γ ∈ τ ∃n, m ∈ N ∀δ ∈ τ [ γm = δm → δ R n ]. (3.3)

Let α ∈ σ.
Define γ ∈ τ such that

γodd = α and γeven = α.

d d

Then: γ R 0 and ¬ (γ R 1) (as γodd = α = γeven ).

Determine m ∈ N such that ∀δ ∈ τ [ γm = δm → δ R 0 ] (see (3.3)). Then

∀δ ∈ τ [ γm = δm → δodd = δeven ]. (3.4)

Now let β ∈ τ with αm = βm.

Define δ ∈ τ by

δodd = α and δeven = β.

d d

Then γm = δm, so by (3.4),

α = δodd = δeven = β.

And we conclude,

∀β ∈ σ [ αm = βm → α = β ].

What does this lemma tell us? Let us view a spread as a tree again. Then the
lemma states: if you are walking up a tree representing a discrete spread, from
some point onwards there is only one way up (in each node there is only one
direction to choose).
Using this lemma, we prove that every discrete spread is enumerable. To define
such an enumeration we first enumerate the set of all finite sequences of natural
numbers. For each admitted finite sequence (i.e. each node in the tree), we
construct an element of the spread by starting at the given finite sequence

26
and choosing, at each step, the leftmost branch. We add the resulting infinite
sequence to our list.
For every element α of the discrete spread, we can find a natural number m
such that any sequence in the spread starting with αm is equal to α. Hence,
if you start in the node αm and take, in each step, the ‘leftmost branch up’,
you construct α (as α is the only path in the spread starting with αm), so α
is in our enumeration. We make this idea precise in the proof of the following
theorem.
Theorem 3.3. For every spread σ, σ is discrete if and only if σ is enumerable.

Proof. Let σ be a spread.

⇒) Suppose σ is discrete.
Let s0 , s1 , . . . be an enumeration of N∗ .
First define α by, for all n ∈ N,

α(n) = µk [ σ(αn ∗ hki) = 0 ].

d

α is well-defined, as σ is a spread and α ∈ σ.

We define a sequence α0 , α1 , . . . as follows:
Let p ∈ N and consider sp .
We distinguish two cases:

1. σ(sp ) = 1.
Then sp is not admitted by σ.
Define αp = α.
d
2. σ(sp ) = 0.
Define αp by:

αp (n) = sp (n) if n < lg(sp ),

d
= µk [ σ(αp n ∗ hki) = 0 ] if n ≥ lg(sp ).
d

Note that this sequence is well-defined and that for each p, α p ∈ σ.

So {α0 , α1 , . . .} ⊆ σ.

Let β ∈ σ.
Determine, using Lemma 3.2, m ∈ N such that

∀γ ∈ σ [ βm = γm → β = γ ]. (3.5)

Determine p ∈ N such that βm = sp .

It follows from the definition of αp that

αp m = sp = βm.

As αp ∈ σ, by (3.5), β = αp ∈ {α0 , α1 , . . .}.

So σ ⊆ {α0 , α1 , . . .}.

27
Hence σ = {α0 , α1 , . . .} and therefore, σ is enumerable.

⇐) Suppose σ is enumerable.
Let {α0 , α1 , . . .} be an enumeration of σ.
Then,

∀α ∈ σ ∃n ∈ N [ α = αn ].

Applying GCP yields:

∀α ∈ σ ∃m, n ∈ N ∀γ ∈ σ [ αm = γm → γ = αn ].

Let α, β ∈ σ.
Determine m, n such that

∀γ ∈ σ [ αm = γm → γ = αn ].

In particular, as αm = αm, α = αn . Hence

∀γ ∈ σ [ αm = γm → γ = α ].

This means that, by considering αm and βm, we are able to decide

α = β ∨ α # β.

So σ is discrete. 

3.2 Discrete fans

Every fan is in particular a spread, so Theorem 3.3 also holds for discrete fans.
However, using the Fan Theorem, we can prove an even stronger statement for
fans, namely

every discrete fan is a finite set. (3.6)

In the context of elementary intuitionistic analysis, this statement is equivalent

to the Fan Theorem.

Theorem 3.4. The statement ‘every discrete fan is a finite set’ is equivalent
to the Fan Theorem

Proof.
⇒) Assume: every discrete fan is a finite set.
Let σ be a fan and B ⊆ N∗ a decidable bar in σ.
We define a function σ 0 : N∗ → {0, 1} by:

σ 0 (s) = 0  ( s ∈ σ ∧ ∀n ≤ lg(s) [ sn ∈
/B]) ∨
( s ∈ σ ∧ ∃n ≤ lg(s) [ sn ∈ B ∧ ∀m < n [ sm ∈ / B]∧
∀i ∈ N [ n < i < lg(s) → s(i) = µj [ σ(si ∗ hji) = 0 ] ] ] ).

28
The idea of σ 0 is that in the beginning, you put all elements of σ also in σ 0 , but
once you are in B, you only take the ‘leftmost way up’ in the fan σ.

σ 0 is a fan law, as:

L1) The statement on the right-hand side of the  - sign is decidable, so σ 0 is

a well-defined function from N∗ to {0, 1}. Clearly σ 0 (h i) = 0.

L2) For any s ∈ N∗ with σ 0 (s) = 0,

σ 0 (s ∗ h µj [σ( s ∗ hji) = 0] i) = 0.

So

∀s ∈ N∗ [ σ 0 (s) = 0 → ∃n ∈ N [ σ 0 (s ∗ hni) = 0 ].

The other direction (←) follows immediately from the way σ 0 is defined.

L3) From the fact that σ 0 ⊆ σ and σ is a fan, it follows that

∀s ∈ N∗ [ σ 0 (s) = 0 → ∃k ∈ N ∀n ∈ N [ σ 0 (s ∗ hni) = 0 → n ≤ k ].

Furthermore, σ 0 is a discrete fan. We prove this as follows.

Let α, β ∈ σ 0 .
Determine k ∈ N such that αk ∈ B.
It follows from the definition of σ 0 that:

∀β ∈ σ 0 [ βk = αk → β = α ].

Hence, by considering βk, we can decide:

α = β ∨ α # β.

As σ 0 is a discrete fan, we can apply the assumption and conclude that σ 0 is

finite. Say σ 0 = {α0 , . . . , αp }.

Define, for 0 ≤ i ≤ n,

ni = µj [ αi j ∈ B ].
d

And define:

B 0 = {α0 n0 , . . . , α0 np }.
d

Then clearly B 0 ⊆ B.

29
The only thing left to show is that B 0 is a bar in σ.

Let α ∈ σ.
B is a decidable bar in σ, so we can define n = µi [ αi ∈ B ].
d
Define β ∈ N by:

β(k) = α(k) if k ≤ n,
d
= µj [ βk ∗ hji ∈ σ ] if k > n.
d

Then β ∈ σ 0 , so we can determine i ∈ N such that β = α i .

As αi n = βn = αn, it follows from the definition of n that n = n i .
And we conclude

αn = αi n = αi ni ∈ B 0 .

So, for all α in σ, there exists a natural number n such that αn is in B 0 . Hence
B 0 is a finite subbar of B.

⇐) Assume the Fan Theorem.

Let σ be a discrete fan.
According to Lemma 3.2,

∀α ∈ σ ∃m ∈ N ∀β ∈ σ [ αm = βm → α = β ].

Using the Unrestricted Fan Theorem we can find M ∈ N such that

∀α ∈ σ ∃m ≤ M ∀β ∈ σ [ αm = βm → α = β ].

So

∀α, β ∈ σ [ αM = βM → α = β ]. (3.7)

As σ is a fan, there are only finitely many s ∈ N ∗ with lg(s) = M and σ(s) = 0.
Combining this with (3.7) gives that σ is finite, as required. 

30
Chapter 4

On open, closed and

enumerable subsets of N

In Chapter 5 we will examine whether there exist choice functions on various

collections of subsets of N . The collection of the closed subsets of N and the
collection of the open subsets of N are two of these collections. Classically,
there are a number of equivalent ways to define the notions of ‘closed’ and
‘open’. Intuitionistically, not all those definitions are equivalent. Before we can
go into the problem of the existence of choice functions we have to be clear on
what collections we are talking about. In this chapter we study the different
definitions and their dependencies.

4.1 All kinds of closed and open

In classical mathematics the most commonly used definition of ‘open’ is the one
that states: a subset A of N is open iff every element of A has a neighbourhood
that is contained in A. Considering N with the metric given by
∞
X
d(α, β) = sg(α(n) − β(n)) · 2−n ,
d
n=0

where, for every natural number m,

sg(m) = 0  m = 0 and sg(m) = 1  m 6= 0,

this notion of ‘open’ corresponds with the intuitionistic notion of ‘weakly open’.
One could also define an open subset of N as a union of basic open subsets of
N , where a subset A of N is basic open iff there exists s ∈ N ∗ with

A = {α ∈ N | α(lg(s)) = s }.

This definition corresponds with the intuitionistic notion of ‘effectively open’,

provided we start from a decidable collection of basic open sets, i.e. A ⊆ N is
effectively open iff there exists a decidable subset B of N ∗ such that
[
A= {α ∈ N | α(lg(s)) = s}.
s∈B

31
A precise definition of these two notions of open is the following.
Definition 4.1. Let G ⊆ N .
We say G is weakly open if and only if for every α ∈ G, there exist n ∈ N, such
that every γ ∈ N passing through αn belongs to G.
We say G is effectively open if and only if there exists β ∈ N such that, for all
α ∈ N , α belongs to G if and only if there exists n ∈ N with αn ∈ D β (i.e.
β(αn) = 1).
In the definition of effectively open we could just as well replace D β by Eβ . To
see this, define for each β ∈ N an element γ β of N by:

γβ (n) = 1 if ∃k ≤ n [ β(k) 6= 0 ∧ β(k) − 1 v n ],

d
=0 otherwise.
d

Then:

{α ∈ N | ∃n [ αn ∈ Eβ ]} = {α ∈ N | ∃n, k [ β(k) = αn + 1 ]},

= {α ∈ N | ∃m [ γβ (αm) = 1 ]},
= {α ∈ N | ∃m [ αm ∈ Dγβ ]}.

One can easily show that every effectively open subset of N is also weakly open.
The converse is not true intuitionistically. We will show this using the Second
Axiom of Continuous Choice (GAC1,1 ).
Theorem 4.2. Not: every weakly open subset of N is effectively open.
Proof. Suppose every weakly open subset of N is effectively open.
Define, for every α ∈ N , a subset Gα of N by

Gα = {γ ∈ N | ∀n [ α(n) = 0 ]}.
d

Gα is weakly open for each α ∈ N (just pick n = 1 for every γ ∈ G α ). So from

the assumption it follows that, for each α in N , G α is effectively open, i.e.:

∀α ∈ N ∃β ∈ N ∀γ ∈ N [ γ ∈ Gα  ∃n [ β(γn) = 1 ] ].

According to GAC1,1 , there exists a function δ : N → N such that

∀α ∈ N ∀γ ∈ N [ γ ∈ Gα  ∃n [ (δ|α)(γn) = 1 ] ].

Consider α = 0.
G0 = N , so in particular 1 ∈ G0 . Hence,

∃n [ (δ|0)(1n) = 1 ].

Determine n such that (δ|0)(1n) = 1 and define m = 1n.

d
Determine k such that δ m (0k) 6= 0.

32
By definition, (δ|0)(m) = δ m (0).
So, for all α ∈ N with αk = 0k, δ m (α) = δ m (0) = 1. Hence,

∀α ∈ N [ αk = 0k → 1 ∈ Gα ]. (4.1)

Define α ∈ N by:

α(n) = 0 if n ≤ k,
d
=1 if n > k.
d

Then αk = 0k and by (4.1), 1 ∈ Gα .

But α(k + 1) = 1, so ¬∀n [ α(n) = 0 ] and Gα = ∅. Contradiction.
We conclude: not every weakly open subset of N is effectively open. 

Let us move on to the closed subsets of N . To begin with, we give a definition

of the notion of the ‘complement of a subset of N ’.

Definition 4.3. Let A ⊆ N .

The complement of A, notation A¬ , is defined by

A¬ = {α ∈ N | α ∈
/ A}.
d

So A¬ is the set of all α in N for which the assumption ‘α belongs to A’ leads

to a contradiction. Note that not for every subset A of N , (A ¬ )¬ = A.

Having two different notions of open, the idea: ‘a set is closed if and only if it is
the complement of an open set’, also leads to two notions of ‘closed subset of N ’.
Note that we say ‘it is the complement of an open set’ and not ‘its complement
is open’. Classically these two statement are equivalent, but intuitionistically
they are not.
We also introduce a third notion of closed, namely ‘sequentially closed’.

Definition 4.4. Let F ⊆ N .

The set F is weakly closed if and only if there exists a weakly open subset G of
N such that F is the complement of G.
We say F is effectively closed if and only if F is the complement of an effectively
open set. Or, equivalently, F is effectively closed if and only if there exists β ∈ N
such that, for all α ∈ N , α belongs to F iff for all n ∈ N, αn ∈ D β .
We call F sequentially closed if and only if, for every γ ∈ N , if, for every n ∈ N,
there exists α ∈ F passing through γn, then γ itself belongs to F .

We will now investigate how those different notions of being ‘closed’ are related.

33
Theorem 4.5. Every weakly closed subset of N is sequentially closed.
Proof. Let F be a weakly closed subset of N .
Suppose γ ∈ N and ∀n ∈ N ∃α ∈ F [ γn = αn ]. We have to prove: γ ∈ F .
As F is weakly closed, we can find a weakly open set G such that F = G ¬ .
Note that:

γ∈F  γ∈
/ G,
 ¬ ( ∃n∀β [ γn = βn → β ∈ G ] ),
 ∀n¬ ( ∀β [ γn = βn → β ∈ G ] ).

Let n ∈ N.
By assumption, there exists α ∈ F , such that γn = αn.
As α ∈ F , ¬ ( ∀β [ αn = βn → β ∈ G ] ). Hence, using γn = αn,

¬ ( ∀β [ γn = βn → β ∈ G ] ).

This holds for all n ∈ N, so γ ∈ F and F is sequentially closed. 

The converse is not true constructively: not every sequentially closed subset is
weakly closed. Let P be an unsolved mathematical problem and define

F = { α ∈ N | P ∨ ¬P }.
d

F is sequentially closed, but not weakly closed.

For suppose F is weakly closed. Then we can find a weakly open set G such
that F = G¬ and, for all α ∈ N ,

¬¬(α ∈ F ) → ¬¬(α ∈
/ G).

As ¬¬(α ∈
/ G) is equivalent to α ∈
/ G, for all α ∈ N ,

¬¬(α ∈ F ) → α ∈ G¬ = F.

So if ¬¬(P ∨ ¬P ), then P ∨ ¬P .
But ¬¬(P ∨ ¬P ) is true intuitionistically and P ∨ ¬P may be reckless [5].

It is clear that every effectively closed subset of N is also weakly closed. How-
ever, as in the case of the open subsets of N , the converse does not hold. The
proof of this theorem resembles the proof of Theorem 4.2.
Theorem 4.6. Not: every weakly closed subset of N is effectively closed.
Proof. Just as in the proof of Theorem 4.2, define, for every α ∈ N ,

Gα = {γ ∈ N | ∀n [ α(n) = 0 ]}.
d

Gα is weakly open, and therefore, Fα = (Gα )¬ is weakly closed.

d
Suppose Fα is effectively closed for each α, then:

∀α ∃β ∀γ [ γ ∈ Fα  ∀n [ β(γn) = 1 ] ].

34
By GAC1,1 , there exists a function δ : N → N such that
∀α ∀γ [ γ ∈ Fα  ∀n [ (δ|α)(γn) = 1 ] ].
Consider 0.
G0 = N , so F0 = ∅ and in particular
1∈
/ F0 . (4.2)
Suppose ∃n [ (δ|0)(1n) 6= 1 ].
Find such n0 and find m such that
∀α [ 0m = αm → (δ|α)(1n0 ) 6= 1 ]. (4.3)
Define α ∈ N by
α(n) = 0 if n ≤ m,
d
=1 if n > m.
d

Then αm = 0m so, by (4.3), (δ|α)(1n0 ) 6= 1 and 1 ∈

/ Fα .
But α(m + 1) = 1, so ¬∀n [ α(n) = 0 ] and Fα = N . Contradiction.
Hence ¬∃n [ (δ|0)(1n) 6= 1 ], which means
∀n [ (δ|0)(1n) = 1 ].
By definition of δ, 1 ∈ F0 , contradicting (4.2).
We conclude: not every weakly closed subset of N is effectively closed. 

We summarize the results on closed subsets of N as follows:

For every subset A of N ,
A is effectively closed→ A is weakly closed → A is sequentially closed.
In Chapter 2 we have introduced spreads (Definition 2.8). Every spread is
sequentially closed. In addition, spreads are located subsets of N . A set A of
N is called located if and only if we can decide, for all s ∈ N ∗ , whether there
exists α in A passing through s or not.
Example 4.7. Consider the subset A of N defined by:
α ∈ A  α = 0 ∨ ( α = 1 ∧ k99 does not exist ).

A is an effectively closed subset of N . For we can define β ∈ N by:

β(n) = 1  ∃m [ n = 0m ∨ (n = 1m ∧ m < k99 ) ].

Then,

α ∈ A  ∀n [ β(αn) = 1 ].
So in particular A is sequentially closed. However, A is not a spread, because
A is not located: we cannot decide whether or not there exists α in A passing
through h 1 i.

35
4.2 Sequentially closed subsets of N
In the previous section we have introduced three notions of ‘closed’. In this
section we study one of them, namely the notion: ‘sequentially closed’. Our
aim is to find a way to characterize finitely enumerable and enumerable subsets
of N that are sequentially closed.

Definition 4.8. Let A ⊆ N .

We define the closure of A, notation A, by

A = {γ ∈ N | ∀n ∈ N ∃α ∈ A [ γn = αn} ].
d

Note that a subset A of N is sequentially closed if and only if A = A.

Furthermore, for any subset A of N, A is sequentially closed. For let A ⊆ N .

It is clear that A ⊆ A. Now suppose γ ∈ A.
To prove γ ∈ A, we have to find, for all n ∈ N, α ∈ A with γn = αn.

Let n ∈ N.
As γ ∈ A, there exists β ∈ A, with

γn = βn. (4.4)

As β ∈ A, there exists α ∈ A, with

βn = αn. (4.5)

Combining (4.4) and (4.5) yields,

γn = αn.

Hence, for all n ∈ N, there exists α ∈ A with γn = αn, and therefore, γ ∈ A.

So A = A.

4.2.1 Finitely enumerable subsets of N

First we consider the finitely enumerable subsets of N . A subset A of N is
called finitely enumerable iff A is of the form {α 0 , . . . , αk }, for certain k ∈ N
and αi ∈ N . Not every finitely enumerable subset of N is sequentially closed.
Define for example α0 , α1 ∈ N by:

α0 = 0.
d

α1 (n) = 0 if n ≤ k99 ,
d
=1 if n > k99 .
d

36
Clearly {α0 , α1 } is finitely enumerable. But this set is not sequentially closed.
For we may define γ ∈ N by

γ(n) = 0 if n ≤ k99 ∨ (n > k99 ∧ k99 is odd),

d
=1 if n > k99 ∧ k99 is even.
d

Then, for all n ∈ N, γn = α0 n ∨ γn = α1 n, so γ ∈ {α0 , α1 }.

Note that:

γ = α0  ∀n ∈ N [ n = k99 → n is even ],
γ = α1  ∀n ∈ N [ n = k99 → n is odd ].

Therefore, we cannot decide γ = α0 ∨ γ = α1 . Hence we have no reason to

affirm γ ∈ {α0 , α1 } and {α0 , α1 } is not sequentially closed.

To characterize the finitely enumerable sequentially closed subsets of N we first

show that these are spreads. This allows us to use the Continuity Principle to
prove any further properties of these subsets of N .

Lemma 4.9. For all k ∈ N, for all α0 , . . . , αk ∈ N ,

{α0 , . . . , αk } is a spread.

Proof. Let k ∈ N and α0 , . . . , αk ∈ N .

Define σ : N∗ → {0, 1} by, for all s ∈ N∗ ,

σ(s) = 0  ∃i ≤ k [ s = αi (lg(s)) ].

The statement on the right-hand side is decidable so σ is a well-defined function.

It is clear that σ is a spread law (defintion 2.8).
Note that:

α ∈ σ  ∀n [ σ(αn) = 0 ],
 ∀n ∃i[ αn = αi n ],
 α ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk }.

So σ = {α0 , . . . , αk } and {α0 , . . . , αk } is a spread. 

A subset A of N is called finite iff there exist k ∈ N and α 0 , . . . , αk ∈ N such

that A = {α0 , . . . , αk } and in addition, for all i < j ≤ k, αi # αj . In the next
theorem we prove that a finitely enumerable subset of N is sequentially closed
if and only if it is finite.

37
Theorem 4.10. For all k ∈ N, for all α0 , . . . , αk ∈ N ,

{α0 , . . . , αk } = {α0 , . . . , αk } ⇔ ∀i, j ≤ k [ αi = αj ∨ αi # αj ].

Proof. Let k ∈ N.
⇐) Suppose ∀i, j ≤ k [ αi = αj ∨ αi # αj ].
It is clear that {α0 , . . . , αk } ⊆ {α0 , . . . , αk }.

Let γ ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk }.
We can assume, for all i < j ≤ k, αi # αj .
Define

M = max( { µp [ αi p 6= αj p ] | i < j ≤ k } ).
d

Then

∀i, j ≤ k [ i 6= j → αi M 6= αj M ].

As γ ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk }, by definition

∀n∃i ≤ k [ γn = αi n ].

Find i such that γM = αi M .

Then γ = αi ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk }.
So {α0 , . . . , αk } ⊆ {α0 , . . . , αk }.

⇒) Suppose {α0 , . . . , αk } = {α0 , . . . , αk }.

Then

∀γ ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk } ∃i ≤ k [ γ = αi ].

As {α0 , . . . , αk } is a spread (Lemma 4.9), we can apply the Continuity Principle.

This yields

∀γ ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk } ∃n, i ∀β ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk } [ γn = βn → β = αi ]. (4.6)

Now let i, j ≤ k.
We have to show: αi = αj ∨ αi # αj .
As αi ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk }, we can find, by applying (4.6), n ∈ N such that

∀β ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk } [ αi n = βn → β = αi ].

We distinguish two cases:

1. αi n 6= αj n.
Then αi # αj .

2. αi n = αj n.
Note that αj ∈ {α0 , . . . , αk }, and therefore, αi = αj .
So we can decide: αi = αj ∨ αi # αj , as required. 

38
4.2.2 Enumerable subsets of N
In the previous sections we have found a way to characterize finitely enumerable
subsets A of N with the property A = A. This makes us wonder whether we
can find such a characterization for enumerable subsets A of N as well. The
Continuity Principle played a crucial role in the proof of the finitely enumerable
case. We were allowed to use this principle, because A is a spread for every
finitely enumerable subset A of N . Unfortunately, this is not in general the
case for enumerable subsets of N .

Example 4.11. Consider the set {α0 , α1 , . . .}, defined by

αn = 0 if n < k99 ,
d
=1 if n ≥ k99 .
d

Suppose {α0 , α1 , . . .} is a spread, say σ.

Then we are able to decide

σ(h1i) = 0 ∨ σ(h1i) 6= 0.

Note that

σ(h1i) = 0  k99 exists.

Hence we can decide

k99 exists ∨ k99 does not exist.

But this statement is reckless.

This is a Brouwerian counterexample. Using the Continuity Principle, one

can obtain a contradiction from the statement: for every α ∈ N , the set
{α0 , α1 , . . .} is a spread.
In the example above {α0 , α1 , . . .} = {α0 , α1 , . . .}. For suppose γ ∈ {α0 , α1 , . . .}.
Then we can determine i ∈ N such that γ1 = α i 1, whence γ = αi ∈ {α0 , α1 , . . .}.

Definition 4.12. Let X ⊆ N .

X is called strictly analytic iff there exists a continuous function f : N → N
such that:

X = ∅ ∨ X = Ran(f ).

We will see that the set {α0 , α1 , . . .} is strictly analytic for each α ∈ N . This
allows us to use the Continuity Principle nevertheless when proving properties
of the enumerable sequentially closed subsets of N .

39
Lemma 4.13. Let α ∈ N and define A = {α0 , α1 , . . .}.
d
If A is sequentially closed, i.e. A = A, then, for all γ 0 ∈ A, there exists n ∈ N,
such that, for all γ1 ∈ A with γ0 n = γ1 n, γ0 = γ1 .

Proof. First we show A is strictly analytic by defining a continuous function

f : N → N with A = Ran(f ). Start from the observation that for every γ ∈ N ,

γ ∈ A  ∀n ∃m [ γn = αm n ].

Hence, by applying the Minimal Axiom of Choice 1 .

γ ∈ A  ∃β ∈ N ∀n [ γn = αβ(n) n ].

We define the function f as follows:

f (β)(n) = αβ(n) (n) if ∀k ≤ n [ f (β)k = αβ(k) k ],

d

= αβ(m) (n) if ∃k ≤ n [ f (β)k 6= αβ(k) k ]

d

and m = µi [ f (β)(i + 1) 6= αβ(i+1) (i + 1) ].

We claim: A = Ran(f ). One proves this as follows.

⊆) Let γ ∈ A.
Then, by definition,

∀n ∃m [ γn = αm n ].

According to the Minimal Axiom of Choice there exists β ∈ N

such that

∀n [ γn = αβ(n) n ].

It follows from the definition of f that γ = f (β) ∈ Ran(f ).

⊇) Let γ ∈ Ran(f ).
Find β such that γ = f (β).
One can prove that ∀n ∃m [ f (β)n = αm n ].
Hence γ ∈ A.

It is clear that f is continuous as

∀β0 , β1 ∈ N [ β0 n = β1 n → f (β0 )n = f (β1 )n ]. (4.7)

Now we are ready to prove the lemma.

Assume A = A and let f be as defined above.
As Ran(f ) = A = A,

∀α ∈ N ∃i ∈ N [ f (α) = αi ].
1
The Minimal Axiom of Choice is AC0,0 as defined on page 15, but with the extra condition
that P ⊆ N × N be decidable. In that case, one may define α ∈ N by α(n) = µm [ P (n, m) ].
d

40
Applying CP yields
∀α ∈ N ∃m, i ∈ N ∀β ∈ N [ αm = βm → f (β) = αi ].
Let γ0 ∈ A and determine α ∈ N such that γ0 = f (α).
Determine natural numbers m and i such that
∀β ∈ N [ αm = βm → f (β) = αi ].
Then in particular γ0 = f (α) = αi , and therefore,
∀β ∈ N [ αm = βm → f (β) = γ0 ]. (4.8)
Let γ1 ∈ A with γ0 m = γ1 m.
We have to show: γ0 = γ1

Determine β ∈ N such that γ1 = f (β) and define δ ∈ N by

δ(k) = α(k) if k < m,
d
= β(k) if k ≥ m.
d

δm = αm, so using (4.7)

f (δ)m = f (α)m = γ0 m = γ1 m = f (β)m.
From place m onwards δ and β are the same. So by the way f is defined we see
f (δ) = f (β) = γ1 . (4.9)

On the other hand δm = αm, so by (4.8)

f (δ) = f (α) = γ0 . (4.10)
Combining (4.9) and (4.10), we conclude γ 0 = γ1 . 

For every subset A of N , an element α of A is called an isolated point of A

iff there exists a natural number n such that all elements of A that start with
αn are equal to α. Lemma 4.13 shows that intuitionistically all elements of a
sequentially closed subset of N are isolated. This is not the case classically.
Consider for example A ⊆ N defined by
A = { 0, h1i ∗ 0, h0, 1i ∗ 0, h0, 0, 1i ∗ 0, . . . }.
d

From a classical point of view this set is sequentially closed, but 0 is not isolated
in A as there is no natural number n such that every element of A that starts
with 0n is equal to 0.
Note that constructively A is not sequentially closed. We could define γ ∈ N
by, for all n ∈ N,
γ(n) = 0 if n 6= k99 ,
d
=1 if n = k99 .
d

Then γ ∈ A, but it is reckless to say γ ∈ A.

41
Corollary 4.14. For all α ∈ N ,

{α0 , α1 , . . .} = {α0 , α1 , . . .} ⇒ ∀i, j [ αi = αj ∨ αi # αj ].

Unfortunately, the converse of Corollary 4.14 does not hold. Define for example
α ∈ N such that, for each n ∈ N,

αn (k) = 1 if k = n,
=0 if k 6= n.

Then

A = {α0 , α1 , . . .} = {h1i ∗ 0, h0, 1i ∗ 0, h0, 0, 1i ∗ 0, . . .}.

Clearly ∀i, j [ αi = αj ∨ αi # αj ].
But A 6= A, as 0 ∈ A and 0 ∈ / A.

So we need to add some extra conditions to characterize α ∈ N with the

property {α0 , α1 , . . .} = {α0 , α1 , . . .}. We start with some definitions.

Definition 4.15.
We define the successor function S : N → N by,

S(n) = n + 1 for all n ∈ N.

d

For all α, β ∈ N , we define the composition of α and β, notation α ◦ β, by

α ◦ β(n) = α(β(n)) for all n ∈ N.

d

For all m ∈ N, we write S (m) for S

| ◦ .{z
. . ◦ S} and note
m times

S (m) (n) = n + m for all n ∈ N.

Combining all these definitions we see that, for every α ∈ N , for every m ∈ N,
the element α ◦ S m of N is given by

(α ◦ S m )(n) = α(n + m) for all n ∈ N.

So we obtain the infinite sequence α ◦ S m by deleting the first m values of the

infinite sequence α.

Definition 4.16. Let s, t ∈ N.

We say s and t are incompatible, notation s ⊥ t, if and only if

¬(s v t) and ¬(t v s).

Note that any infinite sequence of natural numbers passing through t does not
pass through s and the other way around.

42
 Theorem 4.17. For every α ∈ N ,
{α0 , α1 , . . .} = {α0 , α1 , . . .}
⇔ There exist s0 , s1 , . . . ∈ N∗ and β0 , β1 , . . . ∈ N such that
(i) {α0 , α1 , . . .} = {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .},
(ii) ∀i, j ∈ N [ i 6= j → si ⊥ sj ],
(iii) ∀γ ∈ {α0 , α1 , . . .} ∃i ∈ N [ γ(lg(si )) = si ].

Proof. Let α ∈ N and define A = {α0 , α1 , . . .}.

d
⇒) Assume A = A.
We define s0 , s1 , . . . ∈ N∗ and β0 , β1 , . . . ∈ N step by step. While defining these
sequences we also define a third sequence m 0 , m1 , . . . ∈ N, which we use later
on to show that the first two sequences have the required properties.

Step 1 According to Lemma 4.13 we can determine m 0 ∈ N such that

∀γ ∈ A [ γm0 = α0 m0 → γ = α0 ].

Define s0 = α0 m0 and β0 = α0 ◦ S m0 .
d d

Step n+1 Suppose we have already defined s 0 , . . . sk and β0 , . . . βk .

Consider αn+1 .
By Corollary 4.14, ∀i [ αi = αn+1 ∨ αi # αn+1 ].
Distinguish two cases:

1. ∃i < n + 1 [ αi = αn+1 ].
Define mn+1 = 0 and continue with step n + 2.
d
2. ∀i < n + i
αn+1 ].
1[α #
Determine mn+1 such that

∀γ ∈ A [ γmn+1 = αn+1 mn+1 → γ = αn+1 ].

Define sk+1 = αn+1 mn+1 and βk+1 = αn+1 ◦ S mn+1 .

d d

Now we have to show s0 , s1 . . . and β0 , β1 . . . have properties (i), (ii) and (iii).

(i). {α0 , α1 , . . .} = {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .}.

⊆) We will prove this with the principle of course-of-values-induction.

Let n ∈ N and assume for all i < n, αi ∈ {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .}.

Case 1: ∃i < n [ αi = αn ].
Determine such i.
As i < n we can apply the induction hypothesis and find k ∈ N
with αi = sk ∗ βk .
So αn = αi = sk ∗ βk ∈ {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .}.

43
 Case 2: ∀i < n [ αi # αn ].
This means that in the construction of s 0 , s1 . . . and β0 , β1 . . .
new sk and βk are added to the list in step n.
Determine k such that sk , βk are defined in step n.
Then sk = αn mn and βk = αn ◦ S mn .
Hence αn = βk ∗ sk ∈ {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .}.
⊇) Let k ∈ N.
We can determine n ∈ N such that sk = αn mn and βk = αn ◦ S mn .
So sk ∗ βk = αn mn ∗ (αn ◦ S mn ) = αn ∈ {α0 , α1 , . . .}.

(ii). ∀i, j [ i 6= j → si ⊥ sj ].
Let i, j ∈ N with i 6= j. We will prove si ⊥ sj .
Determine p, q ∈ N such that si is constructed in step p and sj is con-
structed in step q. It follows from the way these are constructed that

αp # α q . (4.11)

Suppose si v sj .

Then mp ≤ mq and therefore, as αq mq = sj ,

αq mp = s i = α p mp .

By definition of mp ,

∀γ ∈ A [ γmp = αp mp → γ = αp ].

So in particular, as αq ∈ A and αq mp = si = αp mp ,

αq = α p .

Contradicting (4.11).

Hence si 6v sj .
In a similar way we see that sj 6v si and we conclude si ⊥ sj .

(iii). ∀γ ∈ {α0 , α1 , . . .} ∃i [ γ(lg(si )) = si ].

Let γ ∈ {α0 , α1 , . . .}.
We have to find i ∈ N with γ(lg(si )) = si .
As

{α0 , α1 , . . .} = {α0 , α1 , . . .} = {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .},

we see that

γ ∈ {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .}.

Determine i such that γ = si ∗ βi .

Then γ(lg(si )) = si .

44
⇐) Suppose there exist s0 , s1 , . . . ∈ N∗ and β0 , β1 , . . . ∈ N satisfying require-
ments (i), (ii) and (iii).

It is clear that A ⊆ A.

Let γ ∈ A.
By property (iii) we can determine i ∈ N with γ(lg(s i )) = si .
Using property (ii) we see that, for all j ∈ N with i 6= j,

γ(lg(si )) 6= sj ∗ βj (lg(si )). (4.12)

We have assumed γ ∈ A = {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .}, and therefore,

∀n ∈ N ∃j ∈ N [ γn = sj ∗ βj n ]. (4.13)

Combining (4.12) and (4.13) yields

∀n ∈ N [ γn = si ∗ βi n ].

So γ = si ∗ βi ∈ {s0 ∗ β0 , s1 ∗ β1 , . . .} = {α0 , α1 , . . .}. 

45
Chapter 5

On the existence and

non-existence of certain choice
functions

In this chapter we study the following version of the Axiom of Choice, formu-
lated by Zermelo in 1908:
S
for every family F of non-empty sets, there exists a function f : F → F
such that for each S ∈ F : f (S) ∈ S.

Given a family F, a function satisfying the above condition is called a choice

function on F. We will consider various families of non-empty sets and in-
vestigate whether one can define, in an effective way, a choice function on the
family.

5.1 Choice functions on collections of subsets of N

The Axiom of Choice deals with collections of non-empty sets. Intuitionistically
a subset A of N is called not empty iff ∀n [ n ∈
/ A ]. Note that this is equivalent
to ¬¬∃n [ n ∈ A ]. We want to define a stronger notion.

Definition 5.1. Let A ⊆ N.

A is inhabited if and only if there exists a natural number n with n ∈ A.

A subset A of N may be not empty while we are unable to prove A is inhabited.

For example, let P be a statement we can, at the moment, not prove nor reject
(for example the Riemann Hypothesis) and define:

A = {n ∈ N | (n = 0 ∧ P ) ∨ (n = 1 ∧ ¬P )}.
d

As we can prove ¬¬(P ∨ ¬P ), we have ¬¬(0 ∈ A ∨ 1 ∈ A), which means A is

not empty. But we cannot prove 0 ∈ A, nor 1 ∈ A, so A is not inhabited.

46
In the special case of decidable subsets of N, for any α ∈ N , stating D α is
inhabited and Dα is not empty mean, respectively,

∃n [ α(n) = 1 ] and ¬¬∃n ∈ N [ α(n) = 1 ].

Markov’s Principle says these two statements are equally strong. This principle
is accepted in some branches of constructive mathematics. However, using the
Brouwer-Kripke-axiom one can construct a sequence α(0), α(1), . . . such that
the second statement is intuitionistically true, but the first one is reckless [4].
We will only consider collections of inhabited subsets of N. In the remainder of
the thesis we will use both the term ‘non-empty’ and the term ‘inhabited’ for
the notion defined in 5.1.

Theorem 5.2. Define A = {α ∈ N | Dα is inhabited}.

d
There exists a function f : A → N such that

∀α ∈ A [ α(f (α)) = 1 ].

Proof. Let α ∈ A and define:

f (α) = µi [ α(i) = 1 ].
d

As α ∈ A we know Dα is inhabited, so f is well-defined.

Clearly α(f (α)) = 1. 

Apparently, we can define a choice function on the collection of inhabited

decidable subsets of N. Now let us consider the collection of inhabitedly enu-
merable subsets of N. These are defined as follows.

Definition 5.3. For any α ∈ N we define

IEα = {α(n) | n ∈ N}.

d

Let X ⊆ N.
We say that α inhabitedly enumerates X iff X coincides with IE α .
X is an inhabitedly enumerable subset of N iff some element α of N inhabitedly
enumerates X.

Two different elements of N may inhabitedly enumerate the same subset of N.

Consider, for example, α = (1, 2, 2, 2, 2, . . .) and β = (2, 1, 1, 1, 1, . . .).
d d

IEα = {1, 2} = IEβ ,

but α 6= β.
When defining a choice function on the collection of inhabitedly enumerable
subsets of N using this parametrization, we of course want the choice function
to assign the same value to the above defined α and β. And in general, we
want, for all α, β in N with IEα = IEβ , f (α) = f (β). Unfortunately, this is
impossible, as the following theorem points out.

47
Theorem 5.4. There is no function f : N → N such that
(i). ∀α ∈ N ∃n ∈ N [ f (α) = α(n) ],

(ii). ∀α, β ∈ N [ IEα = IEβ → f (α) = f (β) ].

Proof. Suppose f : N → N satisfies these requirements.
Applying the Continuity Principle yields

∀α ∈ N ∃m ∀β ∈ N [ αm = βm → f (α) = f (β) ].

Note that necessarily f (0) = 0 and f (1) = 1.

Find m0 , m1 such that

∀β ∈ N [ 0m0 = βm0 → f (β) = 0 ]. (5.1)

∀β ∈ N [ 1m1 = βm1 → f (β) = 1 ]. (5.2)

Define β0 , β1 ∈ N by

β0 (n) = 0 if n ≤ m0 ,
d
=1 if n > m0 .
d

β1 (n) = 1 if n ≤ m1 ,
d
=0 if n > m1 .
d

Then

IEβ0 = IEβ1 .

But by (5.1) and (5.2)

f (β0 ) = f (0) = 0 and f (β1 ) = f (1) = 1.

Contradiction. So there is no such function. 

Definition 5.5. Let α ∈ N and k ∈ N. Define:

γαk (n) = α(0) if ∃n0 , . . . , nk−1 < n ∀i, j < k [ i 6= j → α(ni ) 6= α(nj ) ],
d
= α(n) otherwise.
d

For each α ∈ N , we define IEαk = IEγαk .

d
The set {IEαk | α ∈ N } is the collection of all inhabitedly enumerable subsets of
the natural numbers with at most k elements.
Note that we cannot even define a choice function on the collection of inhabitedly
enumerable subsets of N with at most two elements. We can just copy the proof
of Theorem 5.4 replacing IEα by IEα2 .

48
5.2 Choice functions on collections of subsets of C
We move from families of subsets of N to families of subsets of C. To be able to
define a choice function on a collection F of non-empty subsets of C we want a
way to parametrize F.
Definition 5.6. Let X be a set and F a collection of subsets of X.
A C-parametrization of F is a surjective map V : C → F, that is, a map V
such that F = {V (α) | α ∈ C}.
The notion of a ‘N -parametrization’ is defined in a similar way.
Note that in the previous section we have used N -parametrizations of collec-
tions of subsets of N. In this section we mainly consider C-parametrizations.
Therefore, we will focus on these now and leave out the prefix ‘C’ if there is no
confusion possible.

Let X be a set. When we are able to C-parametrize a collection F of non-

empty subsets of X, we can define a choice function on this collection as a
function f : C → X.
As we do not require the parametrization V to be injective, it may happen that
two distinct elements α and β of C are mapped by V to the same element of F
(compare this with the case of enumerable subsets of N, Section 5.1). We want
a choice function on F to assign the same image to α and β. This leads to the
following definition.
Definition 5.7. Let X be a set, F a collection of non-empty subsets of X.
Suppose F is parametrized by the map V : C → F.
A function f : C → X is a choice function on F corresponding to V iff
(i). ∀α ∈ C [ f (α) ∈ V (α) ],

(ii). ∀α, β ∈ C [ V (α) = V (β) → f (α) = f (β) ].

This raises the question:
does the existence of a choice function depend on the chosen parametrization?
Luckily, the answer is ‘no’. For let F be a collection of non-empty subsets of a
set X. Now suppose V , W are C-parametrizations of F. That is, V and W are
surjective functions from C to F such that

{V (α) | α ∈ C} = F = {W (α) | α ∈ C} (5.3)

Suppose there exists a choice function f on F corresponding to V . We will

prove that in this case there is also a choice function on F corresponding to W .
It follows from (5.3) that

∀α ∈ C ∃β ∈ C [ W (α) = V (β) ].

According to GAC1,1 , there exists a function γ : C → C such that

∀α ∈ C [ W (α) = V (γ|α) ].

49
Define a function g : C → C by, for all α ∈ C,

g(α) = f (γ|α).
d

We claim that g is a choice function on F corresponding to W . We show that

g satisfies the two requirements of Definition 5.7.

(i). Let α ∈ C.
g(α) = f (γ|α) ∈ V (γ|α) = W (α).

(ii). Let α, β ∈ C and suppose W (α) = W (β).

Then V (γ|α) = W (α) = W (β) = V (γ|β) and therefore, f (γ|α) = f (γ|β).
Hence g(α) = g(β).

So whether or not there exists a choice function on F does not depend on the
chosen C-parametrization. Note that the same holds for N -parametrizations.
From now on we will usually leave out the phrase ‘corresponding to V ’ when
talking about choice functions.

In the following sections we study collections F of non-empty subsets of C

and ask ourselves:

Can we parametrize F?

And for each collection the main question will be:

Can we define a choice function on F?

We will also make some comments about a number of collections of subsets of

N as some of the proofs given in the next sections also hold if one replaces C
by N .

5.2.1 Finitely enumerable subsets of C

Clearly there exists a choice function on the collection of all subsets of C with
exactly one element. Intuitively we could say: just send each set to its unique
member. To make this precise, we define a parametrization V : α 7→ {α}. Then
the identity map on C is a choice function on this collection.

Definition 2.9 gives us a way to parametrize, for each k ∈ N, the collection

of all subsets of C with at most k elements. For we can define:

Vkf e : α 7→ {α0 , . . . , αk−1 }.

Unfortunately, even for subsets of C with at most two elements we cannot define
a choice function. The proof of this fact resembles the proof of the non-existence
of a choice function on the collection of inhabitedly enumerable subsets of the
natural numbers (Theorem 5.4).

50
Theorem 5.8. There is no choice function f on the collection of subsets of C
with at most 2 elements.

Proof. Suppose such a function f exists. Then f : C → C satisfies

(i). ∀α ∈ C [ f (α) = α0 ∨ f (α) = α1 ],

(ii). ∀α, β ∈ C [ {α0 , α1 } = {β 0 , β 1 } → f (α) = f (β) ].

Then

∀α ∈ C ∃i ∈ {0, 1} [ f (α) = αi ].

Applying the Continuity Principle yields

∀α ∈ C ∃n, i ∀β ∈ C [αn = βn → f (β) = β i ].

In particular we can find n, i ∈ N such that

∀β ∈ C [ 0n = βn → f (β) = β i ]. (5.4)

Let us assume i = 0 (the case i = 1 is proven in a similar way).

Determine k ∈ N such that

h0, ki > n and h1, ki > n.

Define β, γ ∈ C by

β(hp, qi) = 1 if hp, qi = h0, ki,

d
=0 otherwise.
d

γ(hp, qi) = 1 if hp, qi = h1, ki,

d
=0 otherwise.
d

Then {β 0 , β 1 } = {γ 0 , γ 1 }. So by property (ii) of f :

f (β) = f (γ).

On the other hand, βn = γn = 0n. Hence, using (5.4),

f (β) = β 0 and f (γ) = γ 0 .

But β 0 = 0 6= γ 0 . Contradiction! 

51
5.2.2 Sequentially closed subsets of C
The previous section seems to destroy all hopes of finding choice functions for
certain subcollections of C: even for the collection of all subsets of C with at most
two elements we are unable to construct a choice function. Fortunately there are
some further results. In Chapter 4 we have met the sequentially closed subsets
of N . We can parametrize the collection of all sequentially closed subsets of C
generated by two elements as follows,
V2sc : α 7→ { α0 , α1 }.
We are able to define a choice function on this collection.
Theorem 5.9. There exists a choice function on the collection of sequentially
closed subsets of C generated by two elements.
Proof. Let α ∈ C.
We define f (α) step by step.
f (α)(n) = α1 (n) if ∃k ≤ n [ α0 (k) 6= α1 (k) ] and α1 (m) < α0 (m)
d
where m = µk[ α0 (k) 6= α1 (k) ],
= α0 (n) otherwise.
d

So f sends α to the element of {α0 , α1 } that is lexicografically the first.

It is clear that f satifies the two requirements of Definition 5.7. 

Note that for the function f defined in this theorem, not for all α ∈ C:
f (α) = α0 ∨ f (α) = α1 .
Therefore, f is not a choice function as required in Theorem 5.8.

The proof of the theorem above works just as well for N in stead of C. Further-
more it can be generalized to the collection of sequentially closed subsets of N
generated by k elements, where k is any natural number. Hence, for each k we
can define a choice function on the collection of sequentially closed subsets of
N generated by k elements.
Taking the union of all those collections yields the collection of closures of
finitely enumerable subsets of C (or N ). This collection can be parametrized
by
Vfsce : α 7→ {α1 , . . . , αα(0)+1 }.
Also in this case, a choice function may be defined by taking the element that
is lexicografically the first.

The collection of closures of enumerable subsets of C may be parametrized

as follows:
Vωsc : α 7→ {α0 , α1 , . . .}.
There is no choice function on this collection.

52
Theorem 5.10. There is no choice function on the collection of closures of
enumerable subsets of C.

Proof. Suppose f : C → C is a choice function on the collection of closures of

enumerable subsets of C.
Note that Vωsc (0) = {0} and Vωsc (1) = {1}. Hence f (0) = 0 and f (1) = 1.
Using the Continuity Principle, find k 0 , k1 ∈ N such that

∀α ∈ C [ αk0 = 0k0 → f (α)(0) = f (0)(0) ], (5.5)

and

∀α ∈ C [ αk1 = 1k1 → f (α)(0) = f (1)(0) ]. (5.6)

Define γ0 , γ1 ∈ C such that, for all k ∈ N,

γ0k = 0 if k ≤ k0 , γ1k = 1 if k ≤ k1 ,
= 1 if k > k0 . = 0 if k > k1 .
Then certainly γ0 k0 = 0k0 , so by (5.5),

f (γ0 )(0) = 0.

And γ1 k1 = 1k1 , so by (5.6),

f (γ1 )(0) = 1.

Hence f (γ0 ) 6= f (γ1 ).

But Vωsc (γ0 ) = {0, 1} = Vωsc (γ1 ). Contradiction! 

Of course, the proof given above also holds for the collection of closures of
enumerable subsets of N . Hence there is no choice function on this collection
either.
A subcollection of the sequentially closed subsets of N is the collection of
spreads. Every spread is uniquely represented by its spread law. The col-
lection S = {σ ∈ N | σ is a spread law} is strictly analytic, as we can define a
d
surjective function g : N → S by, for all α ∈ N , for all a ∈ N ∗ ,

g(α)(a) = 0 if α0 (a) = 0 ∨ a = h i ∨ ( lg(a) ≥ 1 ∧

d
g(α)(a(lg(a) − 1)) = 0 ∧ a(lg(a) − 1) = α 1 (a(lg(a) − 1) ),
= 1 otherwise.
d

And therefore, the collection of spreads can be parametrization by

Vspr : α 7→ {β ∈ N | β is admitted by the spread law g(α)}

There exists a choice function on the collection of spreads. The idea of this func-
tion is that it assigns to every spread its ‘leftmost path’. A precise construction
of a choice function on this collection is given as follows.

53
Theorem 5.11. There exists a choice function on the collection of spreads.

Proof. Let α ∈ N .
We define f (α) by

f (α)(n) = µi [ g(α)(hf (α)(0), . . . , f (α(n − 1)), ii) = 0 ] for all n ∈ N.

d

As g(α) is a spread law this function is well-defined.

Notice that for all α ∈ N and all n ∈ N,

g(α)(f (α)n) = 0.

Hence, for all α ∈ N , f (α) ∈ Vspr (α).

No two different spread laws represent the same spread. So, for all α, β ∈ N
with Vspr (α) = Vspr (β), g(α) = g(β). It follows immediately from the definition
of f that in that case f (α) = f (β).
So f is a choice function on the collection of spreads. 

On the collection of the sequentially closed subsets of N we cannot define

a functions that sends every set to its ‘leftmost’ element, as, in contrast to
spreads, these sets are not necessarily located.

5.2.3 Effectively open subsets of C

In Chapter 4 we have introduced two notions of ‘open’. The notion of ‘weakly
open’ is, as the name suggest, quite weak. That makes it hard to parametrize
the collection of all non-empty weakly open subsets of C. Therefore, we will
only consider the effectively open subsets of C.
Recall that a subset A of C is effectively open if and only if, there exists β ∈ N
such that A = {α ∈ C | ∃n ∈ N [β(αn) = 1 ]}. This gives us a natural way to
N -parametrize the collection of effectively open subsets of C, namely

Veo : β 7→ {α ∈ C | ∃n ∈ N [ β(αn) = 1 ]}.

But not every effectively open subset of C is non-empty. Notice that, for all
β ∈ N , Veo is non-empty if and only if there exists n ∈ {0, 1} ∗ with β(n) = 1.
To define a parametrization Vieo of the collection of non-empty effectively open
subsets of C we first define, for every β ∈ N , an element γ β of N by

γβ (n) = 1 if n = β(0),
d
= β(n) if n 6= β(0).
d

Then we define for all β ∈ N ,

Vieo : β 7→ {α ∈ C | ∃n ∈ N [γβ (αn) = 1 ]}.

There is no choice function on this collection.

54
Theorem 5.12. There is no choice function on the collection of non-empty
effectively open subsets of C.

Proof. Suppose f : C → C is a choice function on the collection of non-empty

effectively open subsets of C.
Using the Contuinity Principle, it follows that

∀β ∈ N ∃n ∈ N ∀γ ∈ N [ βn = γn → f (β)(0) = f (γ)(0) ]. (5.7)

Define β0 , β1 ∈ N by

β0 (n) = h0i if n = 0,
d
= 0 otherwise.
d

β1 (n) = h1i if n = 0,
d
= 0 otherwise.
d

Notice that Vieo (β0 ) consists of all elements of C starting with 0 and V ieo (β1 )
consists of all elements of C starting with 1.
Hence f (β0 )(0) = 0 and f (β1 )(0) = 1.
By (5.7) we can determine n0 , n1 ∈ N such that, for i = 0, 1,

∀γ ∈ N [ βi ni = γni → f (γ)(0) = i ]. (5.8)

Define k = max(n0 , n1 ).
d
Define γ0 , γ1 ∈ N by

γ0 (n) = h0i if n = 0,
d
=1 if n > k,
d
= 0 otherwise.
d

γ1 (n) = h1i if n = 0,
d
=1 if n > k,
d
= 0 otherwise.
d

Then γ0 n0 = β0 n0 , so by (5.8), f (γ0 )(0) = 0.

In a similar way we see that f (γ1 )(0) = 1. So

f (γ0 ) 6= f (γ1 ).

But Vieo (γ0 ) = N = Vieo (γ1 ). Contradiction! 

55
Chapter 6

Sets of representatives for

equivalence relations

In 1902 Henri Lebesgue published his dissertation “Intégral, longueur, aire” in

which he formulates his integration theory. He introduces a new notion of mea-
sure and of integration in order to obtain more measurable subsets of R and
more measurable and integrable functions from R to R than Riemann, with his
notion, had been able to define.
This raises the question whether perhaps every bounded subset of the reals is
Lebesgue measurable. In 1905 Giuseppe Vitali showed that a classical mathe-
matician accepting the Axiom of Choice must answer this question negatively.
Definition 6.1. Let X be a set and R ⊆ X 2 an equivalence relation on X.
We say A is a set of representatives for R iff
(i). ∀a, a0 ∈ A [ a R a0 → a = a0 ],
(ii). ∀x ∈ X∃a ∈ A [ x R a ].
Vitali considered the equivalence relation ∼ V on [0, 1] defined by:
x ∼V y  x − y ∈ Q. (6.1)
One of the classical equivalents of the Axiom of Choice states:
every equivalence relation has a set of representatives.
Vitali showed that a set of representatives for the relation defined in (6.1) can-
not be Lebesgue measurable.
Lebesgue himself did not accept the Axiom of Choice and for him it remained
possible that every bounded subset of the reals is Lebesgue measurable [6].

In this chapter we study several equivalence relations and see what we can
say about the existence of a set of representatives. We begin by considering
some classes of relations on the set N of the natural numbers and after that we
examine various relations on Cantor space C. There is a connection between
the existence of sets of representatives and the existence of choice functions dis-
cussed in the previous chapter. This connection is the topic of the last section
of this chapter.

56
6.1 Equivalence relations on N
In Section 2.2 we introduced decidable, enumerable and co-enumerable subsets
of the natural numbers. We now extend these notions to relations on N.
Definition 6.2. Let R ⊆ N × N.
R is decidable relation on N if and only if the set { hn, mi | n R m } is a decidable
subset of N. For any α ∈ N , we say α decides R if and only if D α coincides
with this set.
The notions of enumerable and co-enumerable relation on N are defined analo-
gously.
We first consider decidable equivalence relations on N. These have decidable
sets of representatives as you can just pick the smallest element from each
equivalence class. This idea is made precise as follows.
Theorem 6.3. Any decidable equivalence relation R on N has a decidable set
of representatives.
Proof. Define

A = {n ∈ N | ¬ ∃m ≤ n [ n R m ]}.
d

As R is a decidable subset of N × N, A is a decidable subset of N.

It is clear that A satifies the two requirements of Definition 6.1. 

Now suppose R is an equivalence relation on N with a system of representatives

A. Let n, m be natural numbers. By property (ii) of A, we can find a, b ∈ A
such that n R a and m R b.
If a = b then, by the transitivity of R, n R m. On the other hand, if a 6= b,
by property (i) of A, ¬(n R m). As the equality on the natural numbers is
decidable, this means we can decide n R m ∨ ¬(n R m). In other words: any
relation on the natural numbers that has a system of representatives as defined
above is decidable.
We do not want to restrict ourselves to decidable relations and choose to weaken
the notion of a set of representatives.
Definition 6.4. Let X be a set and R ⊆ X 2 an equivalence relation on X.
A is a weak set of representatives for R iff
(i). ∀a, a0 ∈ A [ a R a0 → a = a0 ],
(ii). ∀x ∈ X¬¬∃a ∈ A [ x R a ].
Note that property (ii) is equivalent to:
(ii)’. ∀x ∈ X¬∀a ∈ A [ ¬(a R x) ]
We will now consider enumerable and co-enumerable relations on R. First note
that not every enumerable equivalence relation on N has a decidable weak set
of representatives. For we could define R ⊆ N × N by

n R m  n = m ∨ (((n = 0 ∧ m = 1) ∨ (n = 1 ∧ m = 0)) ∧ k 99 exists).

57
R is an enumerable relation on the natural numbers.
Suppose R has a decidable weak set of representatives A.
As we can decide whether both 0 and 1 are in A or not, we are also able to
decide whether k99 exists or not. But that is a reckless statement.

Using the same idea as in Theorem 6.3 (i.e. picking the smallest element from
each equivalence class), we first prove that every enumerable equivalence rela-
tion on N has a co-enumerable weak set of representatives.

Theorem 6.5. Every enumerable equivalence relation on N has a co-enumerable

weak set of representatives.

Proof. Let R be an enumerable equivalence relation on N.

Find α ∈ N enumerating R.
On page 12 we explained how every natural number n codes a finite sequence
of natural numbers. For every i ≤ lg(n), n(i) denotes the (i + 1)-th term of the
sequence coded by n. Using this, we define β ∈ N by:

β(n) = n(0) + 1 if ∃j < n(0) ∃i ≤ n(1) [ α(i) = h n(0), j i ],

d
=0 otherwise.
d

Note that

n ∈ Eβ  ∃j < n [ n R j ]. (6.2)

We will show that CEβ is a weak set of representatives for R.

(i). ∀a, a0 ∈ CEβ [ a R a0 → a = a0 ].

We prove this as follows.
Let a, a0 ∈ CEβ with a R a0 .
As α enumerates R, we can find k such that α(k) = h a, a 0 i.
Suppose a0 < a.

It follows from (6.2) that a ∈ Eβ .

But we have assumed a ∈ CEβ = N \ Eβ . Contradiction.

So a ≤ a0 .
In a similar way we see: a0 ≤ a.
Hence a = a0 .

(ii). ∀n ∈ N ¬∀a ∈ CEβ [ ¬(a R n) ].

We prove this by course-of-values induction.
Let n ∈ N and assume, for all j < n,

¬∀a ∈ CEβ [ ¬(a R j) ].

58
 Suppose: ∀a ∈ CEβ [ ¬(a R n) ].

Then it follows from the induction hypothesis and the fact that
R is an equivalence relation that ∀j < n [ ¬(j R n) ]. Hence

¬∃j < n [ j R n ].

According to (6.2), n ∈/ Eβ , so n ∈ CEβ .

As R is an equivalence relation, n R n.
Hence there is an element of CEβ that is equivalent to n (namely
n itself). Contradiction.

So ¬∀a ∈ CEβ [ ¬(a R n) ].

Using the idea of ‘picking the smallest element of each equivalence class’ has
resulted in finding a way to define, for every enumerable equivalence relation
on N, a co-enumerable weak set of representatives. This raises the question
whether we can also define, for every enumerable equivalence relation on N, an
enumerable weak set of representatives. The answer to this question is ‘no’.

Theorem 6.6. Not: every enumerable equivalence relation on N has an enu-

merable weak set of representatives.

Proof. Suppose every enumerable equivalence relation on N has an enumerable

weak set of representatives.
For each α ∈ N , we define a relation Rα on N by, for all n, m ∈ N,


n Rα m  n = m ∨ (n = 0 ∧ m = 1) ∨ (n = 1 ∧ m = 0) ∧ ∃k ∈ N [ α(k) 6= 0 ] .

For all α ∈ N , 0 Rα 1 iff there exists a natural number k with α(k) 6= 1.

Note that, for all α ∈ N , Rα is an enumerable equivalence relation on N. Hence
it follows from the assumption that:

∀α ∈ N ∃β ∈ N [ Eβ is a weak set of representatives for R α ].

According to GAC1,1 , there exists a function γ : N → N such that

∀α ∈ N [ Eγ|α is a weak set of representatives for R α ].

Let us consider 0.
Suppose: 0 ∈ Eγ|0 ∧ 1 ∈ Eγ|0

Determine p0 , p1 ∈ N such that

0 = (γ|0)(p0 ) − 1 and 1 = (γ|0)(p1 ) − 1.

Determine k ∈ N such that

∀δ ∈ N [ δk = 0k → ((γ|δ)(p0 ) = (γ|0)(p0 ) ∧ (γ|δ)(p1 ) = (γ|0)(p1 )) ].

59
 Define δ ∈ N by,

δ(n) = 0 if n ≤ k,
d
=1 if n > k.
d

Then δk = 0k, so

(γ|δ)(p0 ) = (γ|0)(p0 ) = 0+1 and (γ|δ)(p1 ) = (γ|0)(p1 ) = 1+1.

So 0 and 1 are both in Eγ|δ .

But as δ(k + 1) = 1, 0 Rδ 1. Contradiction.
We conclude:

¬( 0 ∈ Eγ|0 ∧ 1 ∈ Eγ|0 ). (6.3)

On the other hand, Eγ|0 is a weak system of representatives for R 0 , so by

applying property (ii) of Definition 6.4 for n = 0 and n = 1:

¬¬ ∃m0 ∈ Eγ|0 [ m0 R0 0 ] ∧ ¬¬ ∃m1 ∈ Eγ|0 [ m1 R0 1 ].

As R0 is the trivial relation, it follows that

¬¬(0 ∈ Eγ|0 ) ∧ ¬¬(1 ∈ Eγ|0 ). (6.4)

In general, for all propositions A and B,

if ¬¬A ∧ ¬¬B, then ¬¬(A ∧ B).

By defining:

A = 0 ∈ Eγ|0 and B = 1 ∈ Eγ|0

d d

we see that (6.3) and (6.4) contradict each other.

So not every enumerable equivalence relation on the natural numbers has an

enumerable weak set of representatives. 

We will now see that every co-enumerable equivalence relation on N has an

enumerable weak set of representatives. The proof of this fact is very similar
to the proof of Theorem 6.5.
Theorem 6.7. Every co-enumerable equivalence relation on N has an enu-
marable weak set of representatives.
Proof. Let R be a co-enumerable equivalence relation on N.
Find α ∈ N co-enumerating R and define β ∈ N by:

β(n) = n(0) + 1 if ∀j < n(0) ∃k ≤ n(1) [ α(k) = h n(0), j i ],

d
=0 otherwise.
d

60
We claim that Eβ is a weak systeem of representatives for R. In a similar way
as in the proof of Theorem 6.5 one can show that E β satisfies requirement (i)
of Definition 6.4.
To prove that Eβ satisfies requirement (ii) as well, we first show, for all n ∈ N,
n ∈ Eβ ⇔ ∀j < n ∃k ∈ N [ α(k) = h n, j i ]. (6.5)
Let n ∈ N.
⇒) Suppose n ∈ Eβ .
Determine p such that n = β(p) − 1.
Then, by definition of β,
∀j < n ∃k ≤ p(1) [ α(k) = h n, j i ].

⇐) Suppose ∀j < n ∃k ∈ N [ α(k) = h n, j i ].

Find, for each j < n, a natural number k j with α(kj ) = h n, j i.
Define p = max kj .
d j<n
Then: β(h n, p i) = n.
So n ∈ Eβ .
We now prove by course-of-values induction that E β has property (ii)’.
Let n ∈ N and assume:
∀j < n ¬∀a ∈ Eβ [ ¬(j R a) ].
Suppose ∀a ∈ Eβ [ ¬(n R a) ].
As n R n, this means in particular n ∈
/ Eβ .
Using (6.5) we conclude
¬∀j < n ∃k ∈ N [ α(k) = h n, j i ]. (6.6)
From the induction hypothesis together with the fact that R is an
equivalence relation it follows that
∀j < n [ ¬(n R j) ].
As R is co-enumerated by α this means:
∀j < n ¬¬∃k ∈ N [ α(k) = h n, j i ]. (6.7)
For each n ∈ N, for all propositions A 0 , . . . , An−1 ,
^ ^
if ¬¬ Aj , then ¬¬ Aj .
j<n j<n

By defining, for all j < n,

Aj = ∃k ∈ N [ α(k) = h n, j i ]
d
we see that (6.6) and (6.7) contradict each other.
So ¬∀a ∈ Eβ [ ¬(n R a) ].
Hence Eβ is a weak set of representatives for R. 

One can also prove, in a way comparable to the proof of Theorem 6.6, that not
every co-enumerable equivalence relation on N has a co-enumerable weak set of
representatives. We omit that proof here.

61
6.2 The prisoners and their hats
As promised, we return to the problem of the prisoners formulated in the intro-
duction. Recall, the situation is as follows. Countably infinitely many inmates,
numbered 0, 1, 2, . . . are placed in line facing the positive direction (i.e. each
prisoner can see infinitely many hats). The guard randomly assigns either a
black or a white hat to each prisoner. Then he asks them one by one to guess
the colour of their hats, without the other prisoners being able to hear the an-
swers. If the prisoner guesses correctly, then he is released. If not, he has to
stay in prison for the rest of his life. After being given the rules of the game
and their number, the prisoners get one hour to discuss and come up with a
strategy. What is the best they can do? 1

As said, the classical mathematician accepting the Axiom of Choice, claims

they can ensure that at most finitely many guess wrong. His plan is as follows.
Consider the equivalence relation on C defined by, for all α, β ∈ C,

α ∼a β  ∃n ∀m > n [ α(m) = β(m) ]. (6.8)

In other words: α and β are equivalent if and only if they are almost everywhere
the same.
How does this relation help the prisoners? Each distribution of hats can be
seen as a sequence of zeros and ones (saying each black hat is a one and each
white hat a zero). Before they line up, the prisoners together select, using the
Axiom of Choice(!), one representative from each equivalence class. During the
game there are only finitely many hats a prisoner cannot see, so he can decide
in which equivalence class the actual hat distribution is. He guesses the hat
colour he would have if the chosen representative of that class were the actual
situation. As the sequence resulting from the guesses of the prisoners and the
actual sequence are in the same equivalence class, they differ only in finitely
many positions. This means at most finitely many prisoners guess wrong [7].

6.2.1 Equivalence relation on C

Let us investigate the equivalence relation that helped out the prisoners (see
(6.8)). What can we say intuitionistically about the existence of a set of repre-
sentatives for this relation? First of all it has no enumerable set of representa-
tives as any enumerable subset of C is positively incomplete.

Definition 6.8. Let R be an equivalence relation on C and X ⊆ C.

X is called positively R-incomplete if and only if there exists β ∈ C such that,
for all α ∈ X, ¬ (α R β).

1
A nice puzzle: change the situation to 100 prisoners, each of them being able to hear
the answers of the inmates behind him. How can they ensure (without cheating or using the
Axiom of Choice) at most one of them guesses wrong?

62
Theorem 6.9. Any enumerable subset of C is positively ∼ a -incomplete.

Proof. Let α0 , α1 , . . . ∈ C.
We will define β ∈ C such that ∀i ∈ N [ ¬(β ∼ a αi ) ].
To achieve this we define, for all n ∈ N,

β(n) = 1 − αi (n) where i = µj [ 2j+1 - n ].

d d

Let i ∈ N.
For all natural numbers k,

β(2i · (2k + 1)) = 1 − αi (2i · (2k + 1)) 6= αi (2i · (2k + 1)).

Hence

∀m ∃n [ n > m ∧ β(n) 6= αi (n) ],

and therefore, ¬ (β ∼a αi ). 

Definition 6.10. Let R be an equivalence relation on C and X ⊆ C.

X is called R-independent if and only if for all α, β ∈ C,

if α # β, then ¬(α R β).

There exists an ∼a -independent subset of C that is ‘as big as C’. We may draw
this conclusion from the following result.

Theorem 6.11. There exists a function f : C → C such that:

∀α, β ∈ C [ α # β → ¬ (f (α) ∼a f (β)) ]. (6.9)

Proof. Define f : C → C by,

f (α)(n) = α(n(0)).
d

Now suppose α, β ∈ C and α # β.

Then we can find p ∈ N such that α(p) 6= β(p).
For all m ∈ N,

f (α)(hp, mi) = α(p) 6= β(p) = f (β)(hp, mi).

Hence ¬ (f (α) ∼a f (β)). 

Ran(f ), where f as defined in the proof above, is positively ∼ a -incomplete as

we can define γ ∈ C by:

γ(n) = 0 if n = h0, 2ki for certain k ∈ N,

d
=1 otherwise.
d

63
For all α ∈ C and all m ∈ N,

f (α)(h0, mi) = α(0).

While for each k ∈ N:

γ(h0, 2ki) = 0 and γ(h0, 2k + 1)) = 1.

Hence

∀α ∈ C ∀m ∃n > m [ f (α)(n) 6= γ(n) ].

So ∀α ∈ C [ ¬ (γ ∼a f (α)) ].

This makes us wonder whether every function f : C → C satisfying (6.9) is

positively ∼a -incomplete. Saying ¬ (γ ∼a δ) means:

¬∃n ∀m > n [ γ(m) = δ(m) ].

This statement is quite weak. Therefore, we introduce a stronger notion.

Definition 6.12. Let γ, δ ∈ N .

We say γ is strongly not ∼a related to δ, notation γ ∼
// a δ, if and only if

∀m∃n > m [ γ(n) 6= δ(n) ].

Note that both Theorem 6.9 and Theorem 6.11 still hold if we replace ¬ (α ∼ a β)
by α ∼
// a β. With this strong interpretation of being not ∼ a -equivalent we can
prove that every function f satisfying (6.9) is positively ∼ a -incomplete (where
we replace all occurrences of ¬(α ∼a β) by α ∼ // a β).

Theorem 6.13. For any function f : C → C satisfying:

∀α, β ∈ C [ α # β → f (α) ∼
// a f (β) ]

there exists γ ∈ C such that for all α in C, γ ∼

// a f (α).

Proof. Suppose f : C → C satisfies

∀α, β ∈ C [ α # β → ∀m ∃n > m [ f (α)(n) 6= f (β)(n) ] ]. (6.10)

We will define a strictly increasing sequence k −1 , k0 , k1 , . . . ∈ N and a sequence

γ0 , γ1 , . . . ∈ C such that, for all α ∈ C, for all m ∈ N,

∃n ∈ N [ km ≤ n < km+1 ∧ f (α)(n) 6= γm+1 (n) ].

Then we define γ ∈ N by

γ(n) = γm (n) where m = µi [ ki−1 ≤ n < ki ]

d d

and show that γ has the required property.

64
 The two sequences are defined as follows.
First define k−1 = 0 and do the following for each m ∈ N:
d
Define γm ∈ C by:

γm = 1 − f (0)(n) if n ≤ km−1 ,
d
= f (0)(n) if n > km−1 .
d

Determine, using the Continuity Principle, p ∈ N such that

∀α ∈ C [ αp = 0p → f (α)(km−1 ) = f (0)(km−1 ) ].

Note that

∀α ∈ C [ αp = 0p → f (α)(km−1 ) 6= γm (km−1 ) ]. (6.11)

Define σ = {α ∈ C | αp 6= 0p }.
d
All α in σ are apart from 0, so by applying (6.10) with m = k m−1 :

∀α ∈ σ ∃n > km−1 [ f (α)(n) 6= f (0)(n) ].

As σ is a fan, we can apply the Fan Theorem and find N such that

∀α ∈ σ ∃n ≤ N [ n > km−1 ∧ f (α)(n) 6= f (0)(n) ].

Define km = N + 1.
d
For all n > km−1 , γm (n) = f (0)(n), and therefore,

∀α ∈ σ ∃n [ km−1 < n < km ∧ f (α)(n) 6= γm (n) ] ]. (6.12)

For each α ∈ C we can decide whether αp = 0p or αp 6= 0p, so

combining (6.11) and (6.12) yields

∀α ∈ C ∃n [ km−1 ≤ n < km ∧ f (α)(n) 6= γm (n) ]. (6.13)

Continue with step m + 1

As announced we define γ ∈ N by, for all n ∈ N,

γ(n) = γm (n) where m = µi [ ki−1 ≤ n < ki ].

d d

The sequence k−1 , k0 , k1 , . . . is strictly increasing. Hence it follows from (6.13)

that, for all α ∈ C,

∀m ∃n > m [ γ(n) 6= f (α)(n) ]

and the constructed γ satisfies:

∀α ∈ C [ γ ∼
// a f (α) ].

65
6.2.2 Connection with the Vitali relation
In the previous section we studied the following equivalence relation on C:

α ∼a β  ∃m∀n > m [ α(n) = β(n) ].

This relation is connected to the relation defined by Vitali on R, which we

discussed briefly in the introduction of this chapter. Recall

x ∼V y  x − y ∈ Q.

We will show that there exists a function g : C → R such that, for all α, β ∈ C,

α ∼a β  g(α) ∼V g(β). (6.14)

Hence, for all α and β in C, if we know whether or not g(α) and g(β) are
∼V -equivalent, then we also know whether or not α and β themselves are ∼ a -
equivalent. This means the relation ∼ a is in some sense easier than ∼V . If we
fully understand the Vitali relation, then we also understand the relation ∼ a .

Theorem 6.14. There exists a function g : C → Q such that, for all α, β ∈ C,

α ∼a β  g(α) ∼V g(β).

Proof. To define such a function g we use the infinite sequence of ratio-

nal numbers 0!1 , 1!1 , 2!1 , 3!1
, . . .. This sequence has the special property that the
sum of every one of its infinite subsequences is positively irrational, that is, if
k0 , k1 , k2 , . . . is a strictly increasing infinite sequence of natural numbers, then,
for all q ∈ Q,
∞
X 1
#q
k !
n=0 n

We define g : C → R, by
∞
X 1
g(α) = · α(n).
d
n=0
n!

We have to show that g satisfies (6.14).

First suppose α ∼a β.
Then we can find m ∈ N such that for all n > m, α(n) = β(n), which yields,
∞ ∞
X 1 X 1
g(α) − g(β) = · α(n) − · β(n),
n=0
n! n=0
n!
∞
X 1
= · (α(n) − β(n)),
n!
n=0
m
X 1
= · (α(n) − β(n)) ∈ Q.
n=0
n!

66
So g(α) ∼V g(β).

Now suppose g(α) ∼V g(β).

Then we can find a ∈ Z and b ∈ N such that
∞
a X 1
= · (α(n) − β(n)). (6.15)
b n!
n=0

Determine N ∈ N such that b | N !. Using (6.15),

N ∞
a X 1 X 1
− · (α(n) − β(n)) = · (α(n) − β(n)).
b n! n!
n=0 n=N +1

N
a X 1
As N ! · ( − · (α(n) − β(n)) ) ∈ Z, also
b n!
n=0
∞
X 1
· (α(n) − β(n)) ∈ Z.
n!
n=N +1

Note that
∞ ∞
X 1 X 1
| N! · · (α(n) − β(n)) | ≤ N ! · ,
n! n!
n=N +1 n=N +1
∞
N! X 1
≤ · ,
(N + 1)! n!
n=0
1
≤ · e < 1.
N +1
Hence,
∞
X 1
· (α(n) − β(n)) = 0. (6.16)
n!
n=N +1

As for each k,
∞
X 1 1
| · (α(n) − β(n)) | < ,
n! k!
n=k+1

it follows from (6.16) that, for all k ≥ N + 1, α(n) = β(n).

So α ∼a β. 

Note that the function g defined in the proof above also satisfies, for all α, β ∈ C,
α∼
// a β → ∀q ∈ Q [ g(α) − g(β) # q ].
Hence, by composing the function defined in Theorem 6.11 with g, we conclude,
there exists a function h : C → R, such that
∀α, β ∈ C [ α # β → ∀q ∈ Q [ h(α) − h(β) # q ] ]. (6.17)
A function satisfying (6.17) is called Vitali independent. This notion is quite
strong. We also introduce a weaker notion.

67
Definition 6.15. Let h : C → R.
h is weakly Vitali independent if and only if for all α, β ∈ C, for all q ∈ Q with
q 6= 0, h(α) + q # h(β).
Let us first show that this notion is indeed weaker. We start with a lemma.
Lemma 6.16. For all x, y, z ∈ R,
if x # y, then z # x ∨ z # y (6.18)
Proof. Let x, y, z ∈ R and suppose x # y.
We may assume, without loss of generality, x < y.
Recall, every real number is a shrinking and shriveling sequence of intervals
with rational endpoints. As x # y, we can find, by definition, n ∈ N with
¬ ( x(n) ≈ y(n) ).
Find m ∈ N, such that
z(m)00 − z(m)0 < y(n)0 − x(n)00 .
Define k = max(n, m), then
d

¬ ( z(k) ≈ x(k) ) ∨ ¬ ( z(k) ≈ y(k) ).

Hence z # x ∨ z # y. 

The basic idea of the following proof will reoccur a number of times in the
proofs of Section 7.3 and relies on Lemma 6.16.
Theorem 6.17. Every Vitali independent function from C to R is weakly Vitali
independent.
Proof. Let h : C → R be Vitali independent.
Let α, β ∈ C and q ∈ Q with q 6= 0. We have to show:
h(α) # h(β) + q.
As q 6= 0,
h(β) + q # h(β).
Hence, by applying Lemma 6.16 with x = h(β) + q, y = h(β) and z = h(α),
h(α) # h(β) + q ∨ h(α) # h(β).
In the first case, we are immediately ready. In the second case, α # β and we
can apply the fact that h is Vitali independent, which yields
h(α) # h(β) + q.
So, h is weakly Vitali independent. 

Every weakly Vitali independent function is positively Vitali incomplete. That

is, for every weakly Vitali independent function h : C → R, there exists a real
number x such that, for all α ∈ C, for all q ∈ Q, x # h(α) + q. In the proof of
this statement (Theorem 6.19) we use the following notion.

68
Definition 6.18. Let x ∈ R and a, b ∈ Q. We say [ a, b ] is apart from x,
notation [ a, b ] # x, if and only if x < a or x > b.
Theorem 6.19. Every weakly Vitali independent function from C to R is
positively Vitali incomplete.
Proof. Let h : C → R be weakly Vitali independent.
Then, for all α, β ∈ C, for all q ∈ Q with q 6= 0,
h(α) # h(β) + q. (6.19)
Let q0 , q1 , . . . be an enumeration of the set of all rational numbers that are
unequal to 0 (we denote this set by Q6=0 ).
We will define a shrinking and shriveling sequence of intervals with rational
endpoints (i.e. a real number) inductively, such that in step n we ensure:
∀α ∈ C [ h(α) + qn # [ an , bn ] ].
To start,
[ a−1 , b−1 ] = [ 1, 2 ].
d

Now let n ∈ N and assume that [ an−1 , bn−1 ] has already been defined.
Determine r ∈ Q such that r 6= qn and
h(0) + r ∈ [ an−1 , bn−1 ].
It follows from (6.19) that
∀α ∈ C [ h(α) # h(0) + (r − qn ) ].
By applying the Fan Theorem, we can determine N ∈ N such that
1
∀α ∈ C [ | (h(α) + qn ) − (h(0) + r) | > N ].
Determine an , bn ∈ Q2 with
(i). h(0) + r ∈ [ an , bn ] ⊆ [ an−1 , bn−1 ],
(ii). 0 < bn − an < min( N1 , 12 (bn−1 − an−1 ) ).
The so-defined sequence satisfies, for all α ∈ C, for all n ∈ N,
h(α) + qn # [ an , bn ]. (6.20)
Define x = ([ a0 , b0 ], [ a1 , b1 ], . . .).
As, for all n ∈ N, x ∈ [ an , bn ], it follows from (6.20) that,
∀α ∈ C ∀q ∈ Q [ x # h(α) + q ]
and h is positively Vitali incomplete. 

In Section 7.3 we will see that there is also a connection between weakly Vitali
independent functions and the existence of a Hamel basis for R over Q.
2
Note that finding such an , bn ∈ Q does not require any form of the Axiom of Choice. One
can explicitly give a general algorithm to define them.

69
6.3 Equivalence relations and choice functions
In the previous chapter we have discussed choice functions. There is a connec-
tion between choice functions and equivalence relations. We will explain this
connection for equivalence relations on N and N -parametrizations, but the
same connection exists for equivalence relations on C and C-parametrizations.

For any equivalence relation ∼ on N , the collection F of equivalence classes of ∼

is a collection of non-empty subsets of N . This collection can be parametrized
by the map V : N → F, defined by, for all α ∈ N ,
V : α 7→ {β ∈ N | α ∼ β}.
A choice function f : N → N on F corresponding to V satisfies
(i). ∀α ∈ N [ f (α) ∈ V (α) ],
(ii). ∀α, β ∈ N [ V (α) = V (β) → f (α) = f (β) ].
Using this, one easily proves that,
(i). ∀α ∈ N [ f (α) ∼ α ],
(ii). ∀α, β ∈ N [ f (α) ∼ f (β) → f (α) = f (β) ].
Hence, for any choice function f on the collection of equivalence classes of ∼,
Ran(f ) is a set of representatives for ∼.

On the other hand, for every collection F of non-empty subsets of a set X

parametrized by a function V : N → F, one may define an equivalence rela-
tion ∼ on N by, for all α, β ∈ N ,
α ∼ β  V (α) = V (β). (6.21)
A choice function on F has to satisfy
∀α, β ∈ N [ V (α) = V (β) → f (α) = f (β) ],
which means a choice function has to respect the equivalence relation just de-
fined in (6.21).

6.3.1 Equivalence relation given by the inhabitedly enumerable

subsets of N
In section 5.1 we studied the collection of inhabitedly enumerable subset of N.
This collection is N -parametrized by the map
α 7→ IEα ,
where IEα = {n ∈ N | ∃k ∈ N [ α(k) = n ]}.
As explained above, this gives rise to the following equivalence relation on N :
α ∼ β  IEα = IEβ for all α, β ∈ N .

70
Does this equivalence relation have a weak set of representatives?
Let us first consider an easier case. We study this equivalence relation on C.
Then the answer is ‘yes’.

Theorem 6.20. The equivalence relation on C defined by

α ∼ β  IEα = IEβ

has a weak set of representatives.

Proof. Define A ⊆ C by

A = {0, 1, h1i ∗ 0}.

d

We will show that A is a weak set of representatives for ∼.

It is clear that A is independent. So we only have to show:

∀α ∈ C¬¬ ∃β ∈ A [ α ∼ β ].

Let α ∈ C and suppose ¬ ∃β ∈ A [ α ∼ β ]. Then

¬ (α ∼ 0) ∧ ¬ (α ∼ 1) ∧ ¬ (α ∼ h1i ∗ 0)

Note that
¬ (α ∼ 0)  ¬ ( ∀n ∃m [ α(n) = 0(m)] ∧ ∀m ∃n [ 0(m) = α(n)] )
 ¬ ( ∀n [ α(n) = 0 ] ∧ ∃n [ α(n) = 0 ] )
 ¬¬ ∃n [ α(n) = 1 ]
(6.22)

and

¬ (α ∼ 1)  ¬¬ ∃n [ α(n) = 0 ] (6.23)

and

¬ (α ∼ h1i ∗ 0)  ¬ ( ∀n ∃m [ α(n) = (h1i ∗ 0)(m) ] ∧ ∀m ∃n [ (h1i ∗ 0)(m) = α(n) ])

 ¬ ( ∃n [ α(n) = 0 ] ∧ ∃n [ α(n) = 1 ] ).
(6.24)

For any two propositions A and B,

if ¬¬A ∧ ¬¬B, then ¬¬(A ∧ B).

Hence by defining

A = ∃n [ α(n) = 0 ] and B = ∃n [ α(n) = 1 ],

d d

we see that (6.22), (6.23) and (6.24) lead to a contradiction.

So ¬¬ ∃β ∈ A [ α ∼ β ] and A is a weak set of representatives for ∼. 

71
We move on to N . What can we say about the existence of a weak set of
representatives for ∼ in this case? Well, we may define a subset A of N by, for
all α ∈ N ,

α ∈ A  ∀m ∈ N [ α(m) ≤ α(m+1) ∧ (α(m) = α(m+1) → α(m+1) = α(m+2)) ].

The set A consists of all increasing sequences of natural numbers, which remain
constant as soon as a repetition occurs. Clearly A is independent, that is, for
all α, β ∈ A, if IEα = IEβ , then α = β. But can we also prove:

∀α ∈ N ¬¬∃γ ∈ A [ IEγ = IEα ]? (6.25)

Inspired by an idea of Solovay, Moschovakis has proven

∀α ∈ N ¬¬∃β ∈ N [ IEα = Dβ ], (6.26)

using both Markov’s Principle and Brouwer’s Principle of Bar Induction [8].
Under the assumption of Markov’s Principle (6.25) and (6.26) are equivalent.
We will prove this equivalence first, after which we present Moschovakis’ proof
of (6.26).

Definition 6.21. Markov’s Principle (MP)

Markov’s Principle states, for every decidable subset P of N,

if ¬¬∃n ∈ N [ P (n) ], then ∃n ∈ N [ P (n) ].

Brouwer does not accept this principle. Using the so-called Brouwer-Kripke
axiom, he constructed an infinite sequence of natural numbers α(0), α(1), . . .
such that ¬¬∃n [ α(n) = 0 ], but ∃n [ α(n) = 0 ] is reckless. For a full explanation
of this argument the reader is referred to [4].
Markov’s Principle does not contradict any of the (intuitionistic) axioms we
assume in this thesis.

Theorem 6.22. Under the assumption of Markov’s Principle,

∀α ∈ N ¬¬∃γ ∈ A [ IEγ = IEα ] ⇔ ∀α ∈ N ¬¬∃β ∈ N [ IEα = Dβ ].

Proof.
⇒) This follows immediately from the fact that, for all γ ∈ A, IE γ is decidable.

⇐) Assume ∀α ∈ N ¬¬∃β ∈ N [ IEα = Dβ ].

Let α ∈ N and suppose

¬∃γ ∈ A [ IEγ = IEα ]. (6.27)

We will derive a contradiction.

Note that for any two statements X and Y ,

if X ` ¬Y , then ¬¬X ` ¬Y .

72
Hence we can assume there exists β ∈ N , such that

IEα = Dβ .

Then it follows from (6.27) that ¬∃γ ∈ A [ IE γ = Dβ ], and therefore,

∀γ ∈ A ¬¬∃n ∈ N [ ¬(n ∈ IEγ  n ∈ Dβ ) ].

The statement between parentheses is a decidable property of the natural num-

bers, so we can apply Markov’s Principle, and conclude

∀γ ∈ A ∃n ∈ N [ ¬(n ∈ IEγ  n ∈ Dβ ) ]. (6.28)

As α(0) ∈ IEα = Dβ , Dβ is inhabited and we can find the smallest natural

number p with p ∈ Dβ . Note that p ∈ A, so using (6.28), we can determine
k ∈ N with

¬(k ∈ IEp  k ∈ Dβ ).

As p ∈ Dβ , we conclude

k∈
/ IEp ∧ k ∈ Dβ .

Applying this idea repeatedly we define γ ∈ N by,

γ(0) = k,
d
γ(n + 1) = µi [ i ∈ Dβ ∧ i ∈
/ IEγn∗γ(n) ] for all n ∈ N.
d

Then γ ∈ A and IEγ = Dβ . Contradiction.

Hence,

¬¬∃γ ∈ A [ IEγ = IEα ].

As said, Moschovakis also uses Brouwer’s Principle of Bar Induction in her

proof. This principle states the following.

Definition 6.23. Brouwer’s Principle of Bar Induction (BI)

Brouwer’s Principle of Bar Induction states:

if B ⊆ N∗ is a decidable bar in N and A is a subset of N such that

(i). B ⊆ A,
(ii). for all s ∈ N∗ , if, for all n ∈ N, s ∗ hni ∈ A, then s ∈ A,

then h i ∈ A.

We will not discuss the justification of this principle here, but again we refer
the reader to [4].

73
Theorem 6.24. Assuming Markov’s Principle and Bar Induction,

∀γ ∈ N ¬¬∃α ∈ N [ Dα = IEγ ].

Proof. Let γ ∈ N .
Suppose

¬∃α ∈ N [ Dα = IEγ ]. (6.29)

We will derive a contradiction.

From (6.29) it follows that,

∀α ∈ N ¬ ∀n ∈ N [ α(n) 6= 0  ∃k [ γ(k) = n ] ]. (6.30)

Let α ∈ N .
Define, for all n ∈ N,

Rα (n) = α(n) 6= 0 ∧ ¬∃k [ γ(k) = n ],

d
Sα (n) = α(n) = 0 ∧ ∃k [ γ(k) = n ].
d

Claim 1: ¬¬∃n [ Rα (n) ∨ Sα (n) ].

Suppose ¬∃n [ Rα (n) ∨ Sα (n) ].

Then, for all n ∈ N,

¬Rα (n) ∧ ¬Sα (n)

In that case,

∀n ∈ N [ α(n) 6= 0  ∃k [ γ(k) = n ] ]. (6.31)

For let n ∈ N.
→) Suppose α(n) 6= 0.
As ¬Rα (n), ¬¬∃k [ γ(k) = n ].
Applying MP yields ∃k [ γ(k) = n ].

←) Suppose ∃k [ γ(k) = n ].
As ¬Sα (n), α(n) 6= 0.
So we have proved (6.31), but this contradicts (6.30).

Hence ¬¬∃n [ Rα (n) ∨ Sα (n) ].

Define a subset B of N∗ by: for all s ∈ N∗ , s ∈ B iff for all j < lg(s), either,

(i). s(j) = 0 ∧ ∃k < lg(s) [ γ(k) = j ], or

(ii). s(j) 6= 0 ∧ (γ(s(j) − 1) 6= j ∨ ∃k < s(j) − 1 [ γ(k) = j ]).

74
To show B is a bar in N , we first prove the following.

Claim 2: ∃n [ Rα (n) ∨ Sα (n) ] → ∃n [ αn ∈ B ].

Suppose: ∃n [ Rα (n) ∨ Sα (n) ].

Determine such n. There are two possibilities.

• Rα (n)
In this case, α(n) 6= 0 ∧ ∀k [ γ(k) 6= n ].
So in particular, γ(α(n) − 1) 6= n.
Hence α(n + 1) ∈ B, as j = n satisfies (ii).

• Sα (n)
Then, by definition, α(n) = 0 and ∃k [ γ(k) = n ].
Determine such k.
Then α(max(n, k) + 1) ∈ B, as j = n satisfies (i).

Combining Claim 1 and Claim 2 yields

∀α ∈ N ¬¬∃n [ αn ∈ B ].

As B is a decidable subset of N∗ , we can apply MP and we conclude

∀α ∈ N ∃n [ αn ∈ B ]

and B is a bar in N .

Define a subset A of N∗ by, for all s ∈ N∗ ,

s ∈ A  ∃j < lg(s) [ ( s(j) = 0 ∧ ∃k [ γ(k) = j ] ) ∨

( s(j) 6= 0 ∧ [γ(s(j) − 1) = j → ∃y < s(j) − 1 [ γ(y) = j ] ] ) ]

Claim 3: ∀s ∈ N∗ [ ∀n [ s ∗ hni ∈ A ] → s ∈ A ].

Let s ∈ N∗ and assume, for all n ∈ N, s ∗ hni ∈ A.

Suppose ¬ (s ∈ A).

As s ∗ h0i ∈ A, there exists k ∈ N with

γ(k) = lg(s). (6.32)

For all n, s ∗ hn + 1i ∈ A, and therefore, for all n,

γ(n) = lg(s) → ∃y < n [ γ(y) = lg(s) ]. (6.33)

Combining (6.32) and (6.33), we can define a strictly de-

creasing sequence of natural numbers. Contradiction.

So ¬¬(s ∈ A).

75
 Notice that moving ‘∃k’ to the front in the definition of A does
not make a difference. Therefore, ¬¬(s ∈ A) is a statement of the
form

¬¬∃k [ decidable condition ]

and we can apply MP.

Hence s ∈ A.

It is clear that B ⊆ A. So A satisfies all requirements of Definition 6.23 and we

conclude A(h i). Contradiction!

We conclude: ¬¬∃α ∈ N ∀n ∈ N [ α(n) 6= 0  ∃k ∈ N [ γ(k) = n ] ]. 

76
Chapter 7

Hamel basis

In this chapter we study an other equivalent of the Axiom of Choice. Before

we can formulate this statement we need some definitions.
Let F be a field. A vector space over F is a set V with two operations, addition
and scalar multiplication (multiplication with elements of F ). These operations
have to satisfy a number of criteria, which we do not mention here.

Definition 7.1. Let V be a vector space over a field F .

A subset B of V is a (Hamel) basis for V over F if and only if B satisfies the
following conditions:

(i). B is linearly independent, that is, for all n ∈ N, for any finite sequence
b0 , . . . , bn ∈ B with ∀i < j [ bi 6= bj ], for all t0 , . . . , tn ∈ F ,

if ¬∀i [ ti = 0 ], then t0 · b0 + . . . + tn · bn 6= 0.

(ii). B is complete, that is, for all x ∈ V , there exist n ∈ N, t 0 , . . . , tn ∈ F and

b0 , . . . bn ∈ B, such that

x = t 0 · b0 + . . . + t n · bn .

Using the Axiom of Choice, the classical mathematician can prove,

every vector space has a basis. (7.1)

In 1984 Andreas Blass has proven that (7.1) is classically equivalent to the
Axiom of Choice. In this chapter we study R as a vector space over Q and
investigate the existence of a basis.

7.1 A Hamel independent function from C to R

When trying to find a basis for R over Q one could just attempt to construct
larger and larger independent subsets of R. In this section we will show that
there exists an independent subset of R that is ‘as big as C’. We start with a
definition.

77
Definition 7.2. Let h : C → R.
We say h is Hamel independent if and only if for all n ∈ N, for all finite sequences
α0 , . . . , αn in C satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → αi # αj ], for all t0 , . . . , tn ∈ Q,

if ¬ ∀i [ ti = 0 ], then t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ) # 0.

In the following theorem we construct a Hamel independent function h : C → R.

We will do so by first defining a function f from {0, 1} ∗ , the collection of all
finite sequences of zeros and ones, to the collection of all intervals with rational
endpoints. Then we define, for each α ∈ C,

h(α) = (f (α0), f (α1), f (α2), . . .).

d

Hence f has to be defined in such a way that, first of all, for each α ∈ C, h(α)
is a real number. Second, we have to guarantee that h is Hamel independent.

To formulate the following proof we introduce two operations on the collec-

tion of intervals with rational endpoints.

Definition 7.3. Let a, b, c, d, e ∈ Q.

Addition of two intervals with rational endpoints is defined by:

[a, b] + [c, d] = [ a + c, b + d ],
d

and scalar multiplication is defined by:

e · [a, b] = [ e · a, e · b ] if e ≥ 0,
d
= [ e · b, e · a ] if e < 0.
d

Theorem 7.4. There exists a Hamel independent function h : C → R.

Proof. Let q0 , q1 , . . . be an enumeration of Q.

For each n, let sn0 , . . . , sn2n −1 be an enumeration of {0, 1}n .

We will define a function f : {0, 1}∗ → { [ a, b ] | a, b ∈ Q | a < b } satisfying:

(i). ∀s ∈ {0, 1}∗ ∀i ∈ {0, 1} [ f (s ∗ hii) ⊆ f (s) ]

1
(ii). ∀s ∈ {0, 1}∗ ∀i ∈ {0, 1} [ lg(f (s ∗ hii)) ≤ 2 lg(f (s)) ]
P
(iii). ∀n ∀i ∀p0 , . . . , p2n −1 ≤ n [ ¬ ∀j [ qpj = 0 ] → ( qpj f (snj )) ∩ qpi f (sni ) = ∅ ]
j6=i

We will get to the exact definition of this function later. First note that prop-
erties (i) and (ii) of f guarantee that, for each α ∈ C, (f (α0), f (α1), f (α2), . . .)
is a shrinking and shriveling sequence of intervals with rational endpoints. This
means we can define a function h : C → R by

(h(α))(n) = f (αn).
d

78
To see that the so-defined h is Hamel independent, let α 0 , . . . , αn be a finite
sequence in C satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → α i # αj ] and let t0 , . . . , tn ∈ Q with
¬ ∀i [ ti = 0 ]. We have to prove:

t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ) # 0

Determine p0 , . . . , pn such that qpn = −tn and, for each i < n, qpi = ti .
As ∀i, j [ i 6= j → αi # αj ], we can determine k ∈ N such that

∀i, j [ i 6= j → αi k 6= αj k ]

Define M = max( { pi | 0 ≤ i ≤ n } ∪ {k} ).

d
By property (iii) of f ,
X
( qpj f (αj M ) ) ∩ qpn f (αn M ) = ∅.
j<n

Hence,

t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn−1 h(αn−1 ) # − tn h(αn ).

And we conclude

t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ) # 0.

So we are done once we have defined a function f with the three properties
listed above. We define f inductively, starting with:

f (h i) = [ 1, 2 ].
d

Suppose f has been defined for all s ∈ {0, 1} n .

While defining f for all sequences of length n + 1 we have to ensure:
X
∀i ∀p0 , . . . , p2n −1 ≤ n + 1 [ ¬∀j [ qpj = 0 ] → ( qpj f (sn+1
j ) ) ∩ qpi f (sn+1
i ) = ∅ ].
j6=i

Let m0 , . . . , mk be an enumeration of all finite sequences of the form

hi, r0 , . . . , r2n+1 −1 i,

where 0 ≤ i < 2n+1 , and for all j < 2n+1 , rj ∈ {q0 , . . . qn+1 }, and ri 6= 0.

We define a sequence of functions g−1 , . . . , gk : {0, 1}n+1 → { [ a, b ] | a, b ∈ Q }

such that for all s ∈ {0, 1}n , for i ∈ {0, 1}:

f (s) = g−1 (s ∗ hii) ⊇ g0 (s ∗ hii) ⊇ . . . ⊇ gk (s ∗ hii).

And for each 0 ≤ l ≤ k, with ml = hi, r0 , . . . , r2n+1 −1 i:

X
( rj gl (sn+1
j ) ) ∩ ri gl (sn+1
i ) = ∅. (7.2)
j6=i

79
We will get to the exact definition of the g l in a moment. Assuming we have
defined such a sequence of functions, define, for all s ∈ {0, 1} n+1 ,
1
f (s) = [ gk0 (s), gk0 (s) + · lg( gk (s) ) ].
d 2
Then f (s) ⊆ gk (s) and, because of (7.2), f satisfies (iii) for all sequences of
length n + 1.
Furtermore, for all s ∈ {0, 1}n , i ∈ {0, 1}:

f (s ∗ hii) ⊆ gk (s ∗ hii) ⊆ f (s).

And
1 1
lg( f (s ∗ hii) ) ≤ 2 lg( gk (s ∗ hii) ) ≤ 2 lg( f (s) ).

So f satisfies all requirements.

Now let us come to the precise definition of the g l .

To begin with, define, for each s ∈ {0, 1} n , i ∈ {0, 1},

g−1 (s ∗ hii) = f (s).

d

For 0 ≤ l ≤ k, gl is defined as follows.

Say ml = hi, r0 , . . . , r2n+1 −1 i.
Define for all j 6= i:
0 0
gl (sn+1
j ) = [ gl−1 (sn+1
j ), gl−1 (sn+1
j ) + xj ],
d

1 1
where xj = min( lg( gl−1 (sn+1
j ) ), rj · 2n+1
· ri · lg( gl−1 (sn+1
i ) ) ).
d

Then:
X X 1 1
lg( rj · gl (sn+1
j )) ≤ rj · · n+1 · ri · lg( gl−1 (sn+1
i ) ),
rj 2
j6=i j6=i
2n+1 −1
≤ · ri · lg( gl−1 (sn+1
i ) ),
2n+1
< lg( ri · gl−1 (sn+1
i ) ).

Hence we can find a, b ∈ Q such that

1. [ a, b ] ⊆ ri · gl−1 (sn+1
i ),
P n+1
2. ( rj · gl (sj )) ∩ [ a, b ] = ∅.
j6=i

1
Define gl (sn+1
i )= · [ a, b ].
d ri

Then gl satifies (7.2).

So we can define a function f satisfying (i), (ii) and (iii) and as we have seen,
this enables us to define a Hamel independent function h : C → R. 

80
7.2 A Hamel complete function from C to R?
The result of the previous section makes us wonder whether we can also define
a function h : C → R that is not only Hamel independent, but also complete.

Definition 7.5. Let h : C → R.

We say h is Hamel complete if and only if for all x ∈ R, there exist n ∈ N,
α0 , . . . , αn ∈ C satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → αi # αj ], t0 , . . . , tn ∈ Q, such that

x = t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ).

We say h is positively Hamel incomplete if and only if there exists x ∈ R such

that, for all n ∈ N, for all α0 , . . . , αn ∈ C satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → αi # αj ], for
all t0 , . . . , tn ∈ Q,

x # t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ).

There is no function from C to R that is both Hamel independent and Hamel

complete. And even stronger: every Hamel independent function from C to R
is positively Hamel incomplete.

Theorem 7.6. Every Hamel independent function h : C → R is positively

Hamel incomplete.

Proof. Let h : C → R be Hamel independent.

We will construct a real number x such that, for all n ∈ N, for all α 0 , . . . , αn ∈ C
satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → αi # αj ], for all t0 , . . . , tn ∈ Q,

x # t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ).

Let m0 , m1 , m2 , . . . be an enumeration of all the finite sequences of the form

hs0 , . . . , sk , q0 , . . . , qk i, where

1. for all i ≤ k, si ∈ {0, 1}∗ and qi ∈ Q,

2. ∀i, j ≤ k [ i 6= j → si ⊥ sj ],

3. ∃α ∈ C ∀i ≤ k [ ¬ (si @ α) ].

We will define a sequence of intervals with rational endpoints [ a −1 , b−1 ], [ a0 , b0 ],

[ a1 , b1 ], . . . satisfying

(i). for all n, [ an , bn ] ⊆ [ an−1 , bn−1 ],

1
(ii). for all n, bn − an ≤ 2 (bn − an ),

(iii). for all n, if mn = hs0 , . . . , sk , q0 , . . . , qk i, then

∀β ∈ C [ [ an , bn ] # q0 f (s0 ∗ β 0 ) + . . . + qk f (sk ∗ β k ) ].

81
Before we go into the exact definition of this sequence, we show how this gives
us a real number x with the requested property.
First note that properties (i) and (ii) assure this is a shrinking and shriveling
sequence of intervals with rational endpoints. So we can define a real number
by x = ([ a−1 , b−1 ], [ a0 , b0 ], [ a1 , b1 ], . . .).
d

Property (iii) guarantees that the so-defined x satisfies the requirements. For
suppose α0 , . . . , αn are elements of C satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → α i # αj ] and
t0 , . . . , tn ∈ Q. We can determine N such that

∀i, j ≤ n [ i 6= j → αi N 6= αj N ].

Note that there exists α ∈ C such that

∀i [ ¬ ( αi (N + 1) @ α ) ].

Hence we can determine k ∈ N such that

mk = h α0 (N + 1), . . . , αn (N + 1), t0 , . . . , tn i.

Then, by property (iii) of [ ak , bk ], for all β ∈ C,

[ ak , bk ] # t0 h( α0 (N + 1) ∗ β 0 ) + . . . + tn h( αn (N + 1) ∗ β n ).

So in particular,

[ ak , bk ] # t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ).

As x ∈ [ ak , bk ], this yields

x # t0 h(α0 ) + . . . + tn h(αn ),

as required.

How do we define such a sequence of intervals? To begin with, we ensure

x # 0 by defining

[ a−1 , b−1 ] = [ 1, 2 ].
d

Now suppose [ an−1 , bn−1 ] has been defined.

Consider mn and assume mn = hs0 , . . . , sk , q0 , . . . , qk i.
Property 2 of mn ensures, for all β, γ ∈ C, for all i < j ≤ k,

si ∗ β # sj ∗ γ. (7.3)

By property 3 we can determine α ∈ C such that

∀i ≤ k [ ¬ (si @ α) ].

Note that this guarantees, for all β ∈ C, for all i ≤ k,

si ∗ β # α. (7.4)

82
We can find q ∈ Q such that

q · h(α) ∈ [ an−1 , bn−1 ].

Combining the fact that h is Hamel independent with (7.3) and (7.4) yields

∀β ∈ C [ q0 h(s0 ∗ β 0 ) + . . . + qn h(sn ∗ β n ) − q · h(α) # 0 ].

Hence,

∀β ∈ C ∃n [ | q0 h(s0 ∗ β 0 ) + . . . + qn h(sn β n ) − q · h(α) | > 1

n ].

By applying the Fan Theorem, we can find N ∈ N such that

∀β ∈ C [ | q0 h(s0 ∗ β 0 ) + . . . + qn h(sn β n ) − q · h(α) | > 1

N ].
2
Define M = max( N, bn−1 −a n−1
).
d
We can find a ∈ Q such that
1
q · h(α) ∈ [ a, a + M ] ⊆ [ an−1 , bn−1 ].

Then

∀β ∈ C [ q0 h(s0 ∗ β 0 ) + . . . + qn h(sn ∗ β n ) # [ a, M
1
] ].

Furthermore
1 1
M ≤ 2 (bn−1 − an−1 ).
1
We define [ an , bn ] = [ a, a + M ].
d

So we have defined an infinite sequence of intervals satisfying (i), (ii) and (iii).
As we have seen, this sequence gives us a real number with the required prop-
erty. 

Note that the same result holds for Hamel independent functions h from N × C
to R. The proof is very similar to the proof above. Only in this case, you
consider the finite sequences m of the form m = hs 0 , . . . , sk , q0 , . . . , qk i, where
qi ∈ Q and si ∈ N × {0, 1}∗ with lg(si ) ≥ 1, satisfying properties 2 and 3. As
we require lg(s) ≥ 1 we can still apply the Fan Theorem where we did above.

7.3 Connection with the Vitali relation

In this section we consider a weaker notion of being a ‘Hamel independent
function from N × C → R’, namely the following.
Definition 7.7. Let h : N × C → R.
The function h is called weakly Hamel independent if and only if, for all n ∈ N,
for all α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → h(αi ) # h(αj ) ], and for all
q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q,

if ¬ ∀i [ qi = 0 ], then q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) # 0.

83
This gives rise to a new notion of ‘positively Hamel incomplete’, slightly different
from the one defined in the previous section. In this section we only work with
weakly Hamel independent functions. Hence we choose not to add an extra
adjective to distinguish the two notions, but ask the reader to remember that,
from now on, the following notion is the notion we aim at if we call a function
positively Hamel incomplete.
Definition 7.8. Let h : N × C → R.
We call h positively Hamel incomplete iff there exists x ∈ R such that, for all
n ∈ N, for all α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfying ∀i, j [ i 6= j → h(αi ) # h(αj ) ] and
for all q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q,

q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) # x.

In [9] M.G. Nadkarni and V.S. Sunder mention a connection between Vitali
independent sets and Hamel independent sets. We will give a connection be-
tween the weakly Hamel independent functions and the weakly Vitali indepen-
dent functions defined in Section 6.2.2. Using this, we derive that every weakly
Hamel independent function is positively Hamel incomplete.

7.3.1 Constructing weakly Vitali independent functions

How are the weakly Hamel- and weakly Vitali independent functions related?
Well, for every weakly Hamel independent function h : N × C → R, we will
construct a function gh : N × C → R such that Ran(gh ) consists of all real
numbers x of the form,

q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ),

where n ∈ N, q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q, and α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfy

^ ^
h(αi ) # h(0) and h(αi ) # h(αj ). (7.5)
i i<j

We will show that, for all α, β ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q with q 6= 0,

gh (α) + q · h(0) # gh (β).

Let h : N × C → R be weakly Hamel independent.

If h is a constant function, i.e. Ran(h) = {h(0)}, there is no α ∈ N × C such
that h(α) # h(0) and we cannot define a function g h as requested above (as
its range should be the empty set). We will construct g h in such a way that, if
h is constant, Ran(gh ) = {h(0)} as well. Therefore, we first define a function
fh : N × C → R satisfying

¬ ∃β [ h(β) # h(0) ]  ∀α [ fh (α) = h(0) ], (7.6)

and

∃β [ h(β) # h(0) ]  ∃β ∃q ∀α [ fh (α) = q · h(β) ∧ h(β) # h(0) ]. (7.7)

84
For each α ∈ N×C we construct a shrinking and shriveling sequence of intervals
with rational endpoints fh (α)(0), fh (α)(1), . . . by

fh (α)(n) = h(0)(n) if ∀s ∈ Cn [ h(s ∗ 0)(n) ≈ h(s ∗ 0)(n) ],

d
= q · h(t ∗ 0)(n + p) if ∃s ∈ Cn [ h(s ∗ 0)(n) # h(0)(n) ],
d

where Cn = {s ∈ N × {0, 1}n−1 | s(0) ≤ n}.

d
In this definition t, p and q are determined as follows:

Suppose there exists a natural number n such that

∃s ∈ Cn [ h(s ∗ 0)(n) # h(0)(n) ].

Let m be the smallest natural number with this property and define

t = µs ∈ Cm [ h(s ∗ 0)(m) # h(0)(m) ].

d

As h is weakly Hamel independent, h(t ∗ 0) # 0. Hence we can

determine q ∈ Q such that

q · h(t ∗ 0) ∈ h(0)(m).

To ensure the sequence fh (α)(0), fh (α)(1), . . . is shrinking, define

p = µk ∈ N [ q · h(t ∗ 0)(m + k) ⊆ f (0)(m − 1) ].

d

The function fh , thus defined, satisfies (7.6) and (7.7).

S
Next, we construct a decidable set A ⊆ (N × {0, 1}∗ )n such that, for all
n∈N
n ∈ N, for all α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C,
^ ^
h(αi ) # h(0) ∧ h(αi ) # h(αj )  ∃m ∈ N [ h α0 m, . . . , αn m i ∈ A ].
i i<j

First note that, for all α, β ∈ N × C,

h(α) # h(β)  ∃n ∈ N [ ¬ ( h(α)(n) ≈ h(β)(n) ) ].

Every continuous function from N × C to R is given by an element of Baire

space, that is, there exists γ ∈ N such that, for all α ∈ N × C, for all n ∈ N,

h(α)(n) = (γ|α)(n) = γ n ( α( µk [ γ n (αk) 6= 0 ] ) ) − 1.

This means, for all α, β ∈ N × C,

h(α) # h(β)  ∃n, k, l ∈ N [ γ n (αk) > 0 ∧ γ n (βl) > 0 ∧

¬ ( γ n (αk) − 1 ≈ γ n (βl) − 1 ) ].

85
Define, for all n ∈ N, for all s, t ∈ N × {0, 1} ∗ ,

P (n, s, t) = γ n (s) > 0 ∧ γ n (t) > 0 ∧ ¬ ( γ n (s) − 1 ≈ γ n (t) − 1 ).

d

We define A by, for all q, m ∈ N, for all s 0 , . . . , sq ∈ N × {0, 1}m−1 ,

hs0 , . . . , sk i ∈ A  ∀i ≤ q ∃n, p, q ≤ m [ P (n, 0p, si q) ] ∧

∀i < j ≤ k ∃n, p, q ≤ m [ P (n, si p, sj q) ].

A is a decidable subset of N × {0, 1}∗ and satisfies the requirement.

Now we are ready to define gh .

Let r0 , r1 , . . . be an enumeration of Q.
Let α ∈ N × C.
Remember that every natural number, so in particular α(0), codes a finite
sequence of natural numbers. To simplify the notation, write a = α(0)(0),
b = α(0)(1), c = α(0)(2), d = α(0)(3) and δ = (α(1), α(2), . . .).
We define gh (α) as follows,

if h (hd(0)i ∗ δ 0 ) a, . . . , (hd(b)i ∗ δ b ) a i ∈ A, then

gh (α) = rc(0) · h(hd(0)i ∗ δ 0 ) + . . . + rc(b) · h(hd(b)i ∗ δ b ),

d

and if this decidable condition fails to be true,

gh (α) = fh (α).
d

We claim:

if there exists β ∈ N × C satisfying h(β) # h(0), then Ran(g h ) is

the set of all real numbers x that can be written as

q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn )

where n ∈ N, q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q and α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfying (7.5).

Let us call the set of all these real numbers V h . It is clear that Ran(g) ⊆ Vh .
Now suppose x ∈ Vh .
Determine q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q and α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfying (7.5), such that

x = q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ).

We can find m ∈ N such that

h α0 m, . . . , αn m i ∈ A.

Determine k0 , . . . , kn such that, for each i ≤ n, qi = rki .

86
Define γ ∈ C such that, for all i ≤ n,

γ i = αi ◦ S,

where S is the successor function defined in Definition 4.15.

Then

gh (hm, n, hk0 , . . . , kn i, hα0 (0), . . . , αn (0)ii ∗ δ) = x,

and therefore, x ∈ Ran(gh ).

So Ran(gh ) = Vh .

For the remainder of this section we only consider weakly Hamel independent
functions h for which there exists β ∈ N × C, with h(β) # h(0) (that is, func-
tions with at least two different images).
Whenever we state: ‘for every weakly Hamel-independent function h,. . .’, we
mean: ‘for every weakly Hamel independent function h, for which there exists
β ∈ N × C with h(β) # h(0),. . .’.

7.3.2 Weakly Vitali independence of gh

The function gh defined in the previous section is, in a sense, weakly Vitali
independent as, for all α, β ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q 6=0 ,

gh (α) + q · h(0) # gh (β). (7.8)

The proof of this fact requires some effort.

First note, for all α, β ∈ N × C,

gh (α) = q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) and gh (β) = t0 h(β0 ) + . . . + tm h(βm ),

for certain q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q and α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfying (7.5); and certain

ti , βi satisfying similar conditions.
If we would be able to decide, for all i, j,

h(αi ) = h(βj ) ∨ h(αi ) # h(βj ), (7.9)

then (7.8) would follow immediately from the fact that h is weakly Hamel inde-
pendent. Unfortunately, we are not able to decide (7.9) in general. However, we
are able to prove (7.8) using Lemma 6.16. We will do so using course-of-values
induction.

87
Theorem 7.9. Let h : N × C → R.
If h is weakly Hamel independent, then, for all α, β ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q 6=0 ,

gh (α) + q · h(0) # gh (β).

Proof. Let q ∈ Q6=0 .

We have to show, for all n, m ∈ N,

for all q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q and for all α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfying

^ ^
h(αi ) # h(0) and h(αi ) # h(αj ), (7.10)
i i<j

for all t0 , . . . , tm ∈ Q and for all β0 , . . . , βm , ∈ N × C satisfying

^ ^
h(βi ) # h(0) and h(βi ) # h(βj ), (7.11)
i i<j

the following holds:

q ·h(0)+q0 h(α0 )+. . . +qn h(αn )+−t0 h(β0 )+. . . +−tm h(βm ) # 0.

Call this statement P (n, m).

We will prove, by course-of-values induction,

∀n, m ∈ N [ P (n, m) ].

Let n, m ∈ N and assume, for all k, l ∈ N with k + l < n + m, P (k, l).

We prove P (n, m).

Let q0 , . . . , qn ∈ Q and α0 , . . . , αn ∈ N × C satisfy (7.10), and let t0 , . . . , tm ∈ Q

and β0 , . . . , βm ∈ N × C satisfy (7.11). We have to show:

q · h(0) + q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) + −t0 h(β0 ) + . . . + −tm h(βm ) # 0.

Go through the following procedure:

For j = 0, . . . , m, do the following:

For i = 0, . . . , n, do the following:

By the induction hypothesis,
X X
q · h(0) + qr h(αr ) + (qi − tj )h(αi ) + −ts h(βs ) # 0.
0≤r≤n 0≤s≤m
r6=i s6=j

Re-writing yields:
X X
q · h(0) + qr h(αr ) + −ts h(βs ) + −tj h(αi ) # 0.
0≤r≤n 0≤s≤m
s6=j
| {z }
y

88
 Then, by Lemma 6.16, either,
X X
q · h(0) + qr h(αr ) + −ts h(βs ) # y,
0≤r≤n 0≤s≤m

in which case, h(βj ) # h(βi ), or,

X X
q · h(0) + qr h(αr ) + −ts h(βs ) # 0,
0≤r≤n 0≤s≤m

and we conclude P (n, m).

After this procedure, there are two possibilities:

(i). ∀i, j [ h(αi ) # h(βj ) ].

Then, as h is weakly Hamel independent,
X X
q · h(0) + qr h(αr ) + −ts h(βs ) # 0
0≤r≤n 0≤s≤m

and P (n, m).

(ii). We have concluded P (n, m).

So, in either case, P (n, m).

By course-of-values induction we have proven,

∀n, m ∈ N [ P (n, m) ].

It follows that, for all α, β ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q 6=0 ,

gh (α) + q # gh (β).

7.3.3 Incompleteness of weakly Hamel independent functions

In Section 6.2.2 we have already seen that every weakly Vitali independent
function from C to R is positively Vitali incomplete. The same holds for weakly
Vitali independent functions from N × C to R.

Theorem 7.10. Every weakly Vitali independent function from N × C to R is

positively Vitali incomplete.

Proof. Let g : N × C → R be weakly Vitali independent.

Then, for all α, β ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q6=0 ,

g(α) + q # g(β). (7.12)

We have to construct a real number x such that, for all α ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q,

x # g(α) + q.

89
Let q0 , q1 , . . . be an enumeration of Q.
We will inductively define a shrinking and shriveling sequence of intervals with
rational endpoints, such that in step n we ensure, for all α ∈ N × C with
α(0) ≤ n, for all qi with i ≤ n, g(α) + qi # [ an , bn ].

To begin with, we define

[ a−1 , b−1 ] = [ 1, 2 ].
d

Now let n ∈ N and suppose [ an−1 , bn−1 ] has already been defined.
We consider all elemenents of N × C with α(0) ≤ n and define a shrinking finite
sequence of intervals with rational endpoints [ c −1 , d−1 ], [ c0 , d0 ], . . . , [ cn , dn ].
First, we define

[ c−1 , d−1 ] = [ an−1 , bn−1 ].

d

For 0 ≤ i ≤ n, we do the following.

Determine r ∈ Q such that r 6= qi and g(0) + r ∈ [ cn−1 , dn−1 ].
As r − qi 6= 0, it follows from (7.12) that,

∀β ∈ N≤n × C [ g(0) + (r − qi ) # g(β) ].

Hence, by the Fan Theorem, we can determine N ∈ N, such that

1
∀β ∈ N≤n × C [ | g(0) + r − (g(β) + qi ) | > N ].

Determine ci , di ∈ Q such that

(i). g(0) + r ∈ [ ci , di ] ⊆ [ ci−1 , di−1 ],

1
(ii). 0 < di − ci < N.

Then, for all α ∈ N≤n × C,

g(α) + qi # [ ci , di ].

To ensure the sequence is shriveling, define

[ an , bn ] = [ cn , cn + 21 (dn − cn ) ].
d

Define x = ( [ a0 , b0 ], [ a1 , b1 ], . . .).
This real number x ‘proves’ that g is positively Vitali incomplete. For let
α ∈ N × C and q ∈ Q. We can determine n ∈ N such that q n = q.
Define m = max( n, α(0) ), then
d

g(α) + q # [ am , bm ].

Hence, as x ∈ [ am , bm ],

g(α) + q # x.

90
In a similar way one can prove that, for all y ∈ R, for any function g : N×C → R
satisfying

∀α, β ∈ N × C ∀q ∈ Q6=0 [ g(α) + q · y # g(β) ],

there exists a real number x such that

∀α ∈ N × C ∀q ∈ Q [ x # g(α) + q · y ].

Using Theorem 7.10, and the connection between the weakly Vitali- and the
weakly Hamel independent functions, we prove that every weakly Hamel inde-
pendent function is positively Hamel incomplete. We start with a lemma which
is a generalization of Lemma 6.16.

Lemma 7.11. Let n ∈ N.

For all y, x0 , . . . , xn ∈ R satisfying,

∀i, j ≤ n [ i 6= j → xi # xj ],

there exists k ≤ n such that,

∀i ≤ n [ i 6= k → xi # y ].

Proof. We prove this lemma by course-of-values induction.

It is clear that it is true for n = 0 (pick k = 0, there is no j with j 6= k).

Now assume the statement holds for n and consider n + 1.

Let y, x0 , . . . , xn ∈ R such that, for all i, j ≤ n + 1 with i 6= j, x i # xj .
Applying the induction hypothesis yields k ≤ n, such that,

∀i ≤ n [ i 6= k → xj # y ].

By assumption xk # xn+1 . Therefore, using Lemma 6.16,

y # xk ∨ y # xn+1 .

This means either,

∀i ≤ n + 1 [ i 6= n + 1 → xj # y ].

or,

∀i ≤ n + 1 [ i 6= k → xj # y ].

In either case we see the statement holds for n + 1.

Hence, by course-of-values induction, we conclude that the statement holds for
all natural numbers. 

91
Theorem 7.12. Every weakly Hamel independent function from N × C to R is
positively Hamel incomplete.

Proof. Let h : N × C → R be weakly Hamel independent.

Then, by Theorem 7.9, for all α, β ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q 6=0 ,

gh (α) + q · h(0) # gh (β).

Hence, according to (the comment after) Theorem 7.10, we are able to determine
a real number x such that, for all α ∈ N × C, for all q ∈ Q,

x # gh (α) + q · h(0).

We will show that this x ‘proves’ that h is positively Hamel incomplete.

Let n ∈ N, q0 , . . . qn ∈ Q and α0 , . . . αn ∈ N×C with, for all i < j, h(αi ) # h(αj ).
We claim:

x # q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ).

As, for all i < j, h(αi ) # h(αj ), we can apply Lemma 7.3.3 (with y = h(0))
and find k such that

∀i ≤ n [ i 6= k → h(αi ) # h(0) ].

We may assume, without loss of generality, k = 0.

Then q1 h(α1 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) ∈ Ran(gh ) and therefore,

x # q0 h(0) + q1 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ).

Using Lemma 6.16, we see that either,

q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) # x,

and we have proven our claim, or,

q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) # q0 h(0) + q1 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ),

in which case h(α0 ) # h(0).

As we already know, for all i 6= 0, h(αi ) # h(0), this means

q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) ∈ Ran(gh )

and we can also conclude:

q0 h(α0 ) + . . . + qn h(αn ) # x.

92
7.4 Further research
In [9] Nadkarni and Sunder prove that, classically, a Hamel basis cannot be an
analytic subset of R, that is, there exists no continuous function h : N → R such
that Ran(h) is a basis for R over Q. Their proof relies on the fact that every
analytic subset of the reals is Lebesgue measurable. Nadkarni and Sunder show
that, if there were an analytic Hamel basis, then one could construct a Vitali
set that is an analytic subset of R. As no Vitali set is Lesbesgue measurable,
they conclude there is no analytic Hamel basis.
In view of these classical results, we would like to prove intuitionistically that
every (weakly) Hamel independent function from N to R is positively Hamel
incomplete. Unfortunately, this problem is still open. There exists a connection
between weakly Hamel independent functions from N to R and weakly Vitali
independent functions from N to R, similar to the connection defined in the
previous section for such functions from N × C to R. Therefore, it would be
sufficient to show that every (weakly) Vitali independent function from N to
R is positively Vitali incomplete.

93
Bibliography

[1] Gregory H. Moore, Zermelo’s Axiom of Choice - its origins, development

and influence, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1982. Referenced on page 6.

[2] Herman Rubin and Jean E. Rubin, Equivalents of the Axiom of

Choice, II, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1985. Referenced on page 7.

[3] Stephen C. Kleene and Richard E. Vesley, The Foundations of Intu-

itionistic Mathematics, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1965. Referenced on
page 19.

[4] Wim Veldman, Intuı̈tionistische wiskunde, collegedictaat FNWI, Rad-

boud Universiteit Nijmegen, 2006. Referenced on pages 17, 19, 47, 72
and 73.

[5] Wim Veldman, Brouwer’s Fan Theorem as an Axiom and as a Contrast

to Kleene’s Alternative, Report No.0509, Department of Mathematics,
Radboud University Nijmegen, 2007. Referenced on page 34.

[6] Wim Veldman, Axiomatische verzamelingsleer, collegedictaat FNWI,

Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, 2006. Referenced on page 56.

[7] Christopher S. Hardin and Alan D. Taylor, A Peculiar Connection Be-

tween the Axiom of Choice and Predicting the Future, American Mathe-
matical Monthly, volume 115, 2008, p. 90-96. Referenced on page 62.

[8] Joan R. Moschovakis, Classical and Constructive Hierarchies in Extended

Intuitionistic Analysis, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, volume 68, 2003,
p.1015-1043. Referenced on page 72.

[9] M.G. Nadkarni and V.S. Sunder, Hamel bases and measurability, Math-
ematics Newsletter, volume 14, 2004. Referenced on pages 84 and 93.

94