Modifying the “base” of Veblen's hierarchy to exceed $Gamma_0$ The 2019 Stack Overflow...

Are USB sockets on wall outlets live all the time, even when the switch is off?

Can't find the latex code for the ⍎ (down tack jot) symbol

What is the meaning of Triage in Cybersec world?

Is it possible for the two major parties in the UK to form a coalition with each other instead of a much smaller party?

It's possible to achieve negative score?

Why isn't airport relocation done gradually?

How are circuits which use complex ICs normally simulated?

What can other administrators access on my machine?

Does a dangling wire really electrocute me if I'm standing in water?

Pristine Bit Checking

Deadlock Graph and Interpretation, solution to avoid

Where does the "burst of radiance" from Holy Weapon originate?

Spanish for "widget"

Why can Shazam do this?

What does Linus Torvalds mean when he says that Git "never ever" tracks a file?

The difference between dialogue marks

Unbreakable Formation vs. Cry of the Carnarium

Why don't Unix/Linux systems traverse through directories until they find the required version of a linked library?

Time travel alters history but people keep saying nothing's changed

Can distinct morphisms between curves induce the same morphism on singular cohomology?

Manuscript was "unsubmitted" because the manuscript was deposited in Arxiv Preprints

If the Wish spell is used to duplicate the effect of Simulacrum, are existing duplicates destroyed?

What do the Banks children have against barley water?

What is this 4-propeller plane?



Modifying the “base” of Veblen's hierarchy to exceed $Gamma_0$



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InDo we get predicative ordinals above $Gamma_0$ if we use hyperexponentiation?Is infinitary Levy hierarchy well-defined?What is the least ordinal $beta$ for which the function $f_beta(n)$ in fast-growing hierarchy is incomputable?Ordinals of the form $alpha=omega+alpha$?The Veblen Hierarchy named with uncountable ordinals vs ordinal collapsing functionsHow symmetric is the hierarchy of indecomposable ordinals?Conway Notation for Large Countable OrdinalsIs there a “solution” to the ordinal game?Fixed points of ordinal exponentiation for bases besides $omega$Different definition of Veblen functions












2












$begingroup$


The Veblen hierarchy is usually defined with $varphi_0(x) = omega^x$. As a result, we can define the Feferman–Schütte ordinal as the first fixed point of the function $varphi_alpha(0) = alpha$.



I am wondering if it is possible to exceed this by looking at fixed points for not just the Veblen function index, but simultaneously for the exponentiation base that the hierarchy is built on, as well as the argument. Let's define the following function:



$Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_{beta}(x)$ such that $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$



Or, in other words, the function $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ is just the $beta$'th function of the Veblen hierarchy built on the base $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$.



Given that, here are the questions:



Question 1: does a fixed point for the function $Phi_{x,x}(0) = x$ exist? If so, what is the first one, and is it larger than $Gamma_0$?



Question 2: if we let the argument change as well, no fixed points exist for $Phi_{x,x}(x) = x$ (since none exist for $Phi_{x,0}(x) = x^x neq x$). However, is there any value $x < Gamma_0$ for which $Phi_{x,x}(x) geq Gamma_0$? If so, what is the first such $x$?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is not an answer but here is an observation that might possibly be helpful. If we look at the function $f(x)=omega^x$ and try to find its first fixed-point beyond $epsilon_0$ then we want to calculate the terms $f^n(epsilon_0+1)$ (where $n in mathbb{N}^+$). What we have is $f(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0 cdot omega$, $f^2(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0^omega$. I think it is likely that if you continue it you will get a tower of $epsilon_0$'s (since that's I re-call reading about $epsilon_1$ somewhere). Ultimately we could prove it by induction and quite a bit of calculation. (cont.)
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:40










  • $begingroup$
    Maybe there is an easier way(?) but I don't know about it. On the other hand if we now consider the function $g(x)=(epsilon_0)^x$ its first fixed point will also be the same. That's significantly easier to see. We have $g(0)=1$, $g^2(0)=epsilon_0$, $g^3(0)={epsilon_0}^{epsilon_0}$ and so on. Meaning the first fixed point of $g$ is same as the first fixed-point of $f$ after $epsilon_0$.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:41












  • $begingroup$
    Also, one other point. If we consider the function $x mapsto varphi_{varphi_x(0)}(0)$ I think it will be normal because $x mapsto varphi_x(0)$ is normal. So it will have a fixed point. My feeling is that (maybe) this function might be related to the function mentioned in (Q1) in some way.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 13:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, it is true that $epsilon_1 = epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{...}}}$, and likewise for $epsilon_2 = epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{...}}}$ and so on; this is shown pretty well here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_numbers_(mathematics). So yeah, if we change the base of exponentiation from $omega$ to $epsilon_0$, we get the same fixed-point sequence, just missing the first entry, and likewise for any epsilon number...
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Battaglia
    Mar 2 at 1:09








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A brief comment: my suggestion basically was to use the values $varphi_{x}(0)$ as the "base" (for increasing values of $x$) and then checking how the resulting hierarchy "compares" with the original one (the one starting with "base" $omega$). Anyway....
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 2 at 14:28


















2












$begingroup$


The Veblen hierarchy is usually defined with $varphi_0(x) = omega^x$. As a result, we can define the Feferman–Schütte ordinal as the first fixed point of the function $varphi_alpha(0) = alpha$.



I am wondering if it is possible to exceed this by looking at fixed points for not just the Veblen function index, but simultaneously for the exponentiation base that the hierarchy is built on, as well as the argument. Let's define the following function:



$Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_{beta}(x)$ such that $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$



Or, in other words, the function $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ is just the $beta$'th function of the Veblen hierarchy built on the base $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$.



Given that, here are the questions:



Question 1: does a fixed point for the function $Phi_{x,x}(0) = x$ exist? If so, what is the first one, and is it larger than $Gamma_0$?



Question 2: if we let the argument change as well, no fixed points exist for $Phi_{x,x}(x) = x$ (since none exist for $Phi_{x,0}(x) = x^x neq x$). However, is there any value $x < Gamma_0$ for which $Phi_{x,x}(x) geq Gamma_0$? If so, what is the first such $x$?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is not an answer but here is an observation that might possibly be helpful. If we look at the function $f(x)=omega^x$ and try to find its first fixed-point beyond $epsilon_0$ then we want to calculate the terms $f^n(epsilon_0+1)$ (where $n in mathbb{N}^+$). What we have is $f(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0 cdot omega$, $f^2(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0^omega$. I think it is likely that if you continue it you will get a tower of $epsilon_0$'s (since that's I re-call reading about $epsilon_1$ somewhere). Ultimately we could prove it by induction and quite a bit of calculation. (cont.)
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:40










  • $begingroup$
    Maybe there is an easier way(?) but I don't know about it. On the other hand if we now consider the function $g(x)=(epsilon_0)^x$ its first fixed point will also be the same. That's significantly easier to see. We have $g(0)=1$, $g^2(0)=epsilon_0$, $g^3(0)={epsilon_0}^{epsilon_0}$ and so on. Meaning the first fixed point of $g$ is same as the first fixed-point of $f$ after $epsilon_0$.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:41












  • $begingroup$
    Also, one other point. If we consider the function $x mapsto varphi_{varphi_x(0)}(0)$ I think it will be normal because $x mapsto varphi_x(0)$ is normal. So it will have a fixed point. My feeling is that (maybe) this function might be related to the function mentioned in (Q1) in some way.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 13:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, it is true that $epsilon_1 = epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{...}}}$, and likewise for $epsilon_2 = epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{...}}}$ and so on; this is shown pretty well here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_numbers_(mathematics). So yeah, if we change the base of exponentiation from $omega$ to $epsilon_0$, we get the same fixed-point sequence, just missing the first entry, and likewise for any epsilon number...
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Battaglia
    Mar 2 at 1:09








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A brief comment: my suggestion basically was to use the values $varphi_{x}(0)$ as the "base" (for increasing values of $x$) and then checking how the resulting hierarchy "compares" with the original one (the one starting with "base" $omega$). Anyway....
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 2 at 14:28
















2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


The Veblen hierarchy is usually defined with $varphi_0(x) = omega^x$. As a result, we can define the Feferman–Schütte ordinal as the first fixed point of the function $varphi_alpha(0) = alpha$.



I am wondering if it is possible to exceed this by looking at fixed points for not just the Veblen function index, but simultaneously for the exponentiation base that the hierarchy is built on, as well as the argument. Let's define the following function:



$Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_{beta}(x)$ such that $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$



Or, in other words, the function $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ is just the $beta$'th function of the Veblen hierarchy built on the base $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$.



Given that, here are the questions:



Question 1: does a fixed point for the function $Phi_{x,x}(0) = x$ exist? If so, what is the first one, and is it larger than $Gamma_0$?



Question 2: if we let the argument change as well, no fixed points exist for $Phi_{x,x}(x) = x$ (since none exist for $Phi_{x,0}(x) = x^x neq x$). However, is there any value $x < Gamma_0$ for which $Phi_{x,x}(x) geq Gamma_0$? If so, what is the first such $x$?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




The Veblen hierarchy is usually defined with $varphi_0(x) = omega^x$. As a result, we can define the Feferman–Schütte ordinal as the first fixed point of the function $varphi_alpha(0) = alpha$.



I am wondering if it is possible to exceed this by looking at fixed points for not just the Veblen function index, but simultaneously for the exponentiation base that the hierarchy is built on, as well as the argument. Let's define the following function:



$Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_{beta}(x)$ such that $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$



Or, in other words, the function $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ is just the $beta$'th function of the Veblen hierarchy built on the base $varphi_0(x) = alpha^x$.



Given that, here are the questions:



Question 1: does a fixed point for the function $Phi_{x,x}(0) = x$ exist? If so, what is the first one, and is it larger than $Gamma_0$?



Question 2: if we let the argument change as well, no fixed points exist for $Phi_{x,x}(x) = x$ (since none exist for $Phi_{x,0}(x) = x^x neq x$). However, is there any value $x < Gamma_0$ for which $Phi_{x,x}(x) geq Gamma_0$? If so, what is the first such $x$?







set-theory ordinals fixed-point-theorems fixedpoints ordinal-analysis






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Mar 1 at 7:44









Mike BattagliaMike Battaglia

1,6341130




1,6341130












  • $begingroup$
    This is not an answer but here is an observation that might possibly be helpful. If we look at the function $f(x)=omega^x$ and try to find its first fixed-point beyond $epsilon_0$ then we want to calculate the terms $f^n(epsilon_0+1)$ (where $n in mathbb{N}^+$). What we have is $f(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0 cdot omega$, $f^2(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0^omega$. I think it is likely that if you continue it you will get a tower of $epsilon_0$'s (since that's I re-call reading about $epsilon_1$ somewhere). Ultimately we could prove it by induction and quite a bit of calculation. (cont.)
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:40










  • $begingroup$
    Maybe there is an easier way(?) but I don't know about it. On the other hand if we now consider the function $g(x)=(epsilon_0)^x$ its first fixed point will also be the same. That's significantly easier to see. We have $g(0)=1$, $g^2(0)=epsilon_0$, $g^3(0)={epsilon_0}^{epsilon_0}$ and so on. Meaning the first fixed point of $g$ is same as the first fixed-point of $f$ after $epsilon_0$.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:41












  • $begingroup$
    Also, one other point. If we consider the function $x mapsto varphi_{varphi_x(0)}(0)$ I think it will be normal because $x mapsto varphi_x(0)$ is normal. So it will have a fixed point. My feeling is that (maybe) this function might be related to the function mentioned in (Q1) in some way.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 13:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, it is true that $epsilon_1 = epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{...}}}$, and likewise for $epsilon_2 = epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{...}}}$ and so on; this is shown pretty well here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_numbers_(mathematics). So yeah, if we change the base of exponentiation from $omega$ to $epsilon_0$, we get the same fixed-point sequence, just missing the first entry, and likewise for any epsilon number...
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Battaglia
    Mar 2 at 1:09








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A brief comment: my suggestion basically was to use the values $varphi_{x}(0)$ as the "base" (for increasing values of $x$) and then checking how the resulting hierarchy "compares" with the original one (the one starting with "base" $omega$). Anyway....
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 2 at 14:28




















  • $begingroup$
    This is not an answer but here is an observation that might possibly be helpful. If we look at the function $f(x)=omega^x$ and try to find its first fixed-point beyond $epsilon_0$ then we want to calculate the terms $f^n(epsilon_0+1)$ (where $n in mathbb{N}^+$). What we have is $f(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0 cdot omega$, $f^2(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0^omega$. I think it is likely that if you continue it you will get a tower of $epsilon_0$'s (since that's I re-call reading about $epsilon_1$ somewhere). Ultimately we could prove it by induction and quite a bit of calculation. (cont.)
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:40










  • $begingroup$
    Maybe there is an easier way(?) but I don't know about it. On the other hand if we now consider the function $g(x)=(epsilon_0)^x$ its first fixed point will also be the same. That's significantly easier to see. We have $g(0)=1$, $g^2(0)=epsilon_0$, $g^3(0)={epsilon_0}^{epsilon_0}$ and so on. Meaning the first fixed point of $g$ is same as the first fixed-point of $f$ after $epsilon_0$.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 11:41












  • $begingroup$
    Also, one other point. If we consider the function $x mapsto varphi_{varphi_x(0)}(0)$ I think it will be normal because $x mapsto varphi_x(0)$ is normal. So it will have a fixed point. My feeling is that (maybe) this function might be related to the function mentioned in (Q1) in some way.
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 1 at 13:47






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Yes, it is true that $epsilon_1 = epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{...}}}$, and likewise for $epsilon_2 = epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{...}}}$ and so on; this is shown pretty well here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_numbers_(mathematics). So yeah, if we change the base of exponentiation from $omega$ to $epsilon_0$, we get the same fixed-point sequence, just missing the first entry, and likewise for any epsilon number...
    $endgroup$
    – Mike Battaglia
    Mar 2 at 1:09








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    A brief comment: my suggestion basically was to use the values $varphi_{x}(0)$ as the "base" (for increasing values of $x$) and then checking how the resulting hierarchy "compares" with the original one (the one starting with "base" $omega$). Anyway....
    $endgroup$
    – SSequence
    Mar 2 at 14:28


















$begingroup$
This is not an answer but here is an observation that might possibly be helpful. If we look at the function $f(x)=omega^x$ and try to find its first fixed-point beyond $epsilon_0$ then we want to calculate the terms $f^n(epsilon_0+1)$ (where $n in mathbb{N}^+$). What we have is $f(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0 cdot omega$, $f^2(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0^omega$. I think it is likely that if you continue it you will get a tower of $epsilon_0$'s (since that's I re-call reading about $epsilon_1$ somewhere). Ultimately we could prove it by induction and quite a bit of calculation. (cont.)
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 1 at 11:40




$begingroup$
This is not an answer but here is an observation that might possibly be helpful. If we look at the function $f(x)=omega^x$ and try to find its first fixed-point beyond $epsilon_0$ then we want to calculate the terms $f^n(epsilon_0+1)$ (where $n in mathbb{N}^+$). What we have is $f(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0 cdot omega$, $f^2(epsilon_0+1)=epsilon_0^omega$. I think it is likely that if you continue it you will get a tower of $epsilon_0$'s (since that's I re-call reading about $epsilon_1$ somewhere). Ultimately we could prove it by induction and quite a bit of calculation. (cont.)
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 1 at 11:40












$begingroup$
Maybe there is an easier way(?) but I don't know about it. On the other hand if we now consider the function $g(x)=(epsilon_0)^x$ its first fixed point will also be the same. That's significantly easier to see. We have $g(0)=1$, $g^2(0)=epsilon_0$, $g^3(0)={epsilon_0}^{epsilon_0}$ and so on. Meaning the first fixed point of $g$ is same as the first fixed-point of $f$ after $epsilon_0$.
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 1 at 11:41






$begingroup$
Maybe there is an easier way(?) but I don't know about it. On the other hand if we now consider the function $g(x)=(epsilon_0)^x$ its first fixed point will also be the same. That's significantly easier to see. We have $g(0)=1$, $g^2(0)=epsilon_0$, $g^3(0)={epsilon_0}^{epsilon_0}$ and so on. Meaning the first fixed point of $g$ is same as the first fixed-point of $f$ after $epsilon_0$.
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 1 at 11:41














$begingroup$
Also, one other point. If we consider the function $x mapsto varphi_{varphi_x(0)}(0)$ I think it will be normal because $x mapsto varphi_x(0)$ is normal. So it will have a fixed point. My feeling is that (maybe) this function might be related to the function mentioned in (Q1) in some way.
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 1 at 13:47




$begingroup$
Also, one other point. If we consider the function $x mapsto varphi_{varphi_x(0)}(0)$ I think it will be normal because $x mapsto varphi_x(0)$ is normal. So it will have a fixed point. My feeling is that (maybe) this function might be related to the function mentioned in (Q1) in some way.
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 1 at 13:47




1




1




$begingroup$
Yes, it is true that $epsilon_1 = epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{...}}}$, and likewise for $epsilon_2 = epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{...}}}$ and so on; this is shown pretty well here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_numbers_(mathematics). So yeah, if we change the base of exponentiation from $omega$ to $epsilon_0$, we get the same fixed-point sequence, just missing the first entry, and likewise for any epsilon number...
$endgroup$
– Mike Battaglia
Mar 2 at 1:09






$begingroup$
Yes, it is true that $epsilon_1 = epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{epsilon_0^{...}}}$, and likewise for $epsilon_2 = epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{epsilon_1^{...}}}$ and so on; this is shown pretty well here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_numbers_(mathematics). So yeah, if we change the base of exponentiation from $omega$ to $epsilon_0$, we get the same fixed-point sequence, just missing the first entry, and likewise for any epsilon number...
$endgroup$
– Mike Battaglia
Mar 2 at 1:09






1




1




$begingroup$
A brief comment: my suggestion basically was to use the values $varphi_{x}(0)$ as the "base" (for increasing values of $x$) and then checking how the resulting hierarchy "compares" with the original one (the one starting with "base" $omega$). Anyway....
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 2 at 14:28






$begingroup$
A brief comment: my suggestion basically was to use the values $varphi_{x}(0)$ as the "base" (for increasing values of $x$) and then checking how the resulting hierarchy "compares" with the original one (the one starting with "base" $omega$). Anyway....
$endgroup$
– SSequence
Mar 2 at 14:28












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

Question 1: If we include finite ordinals, then the only solution is $Phi_{1,1}(0) = 1$. (and $Phi_{0,0}(0) = 0$ if one chooses to set $0^0 = 0$) For $alpha > 1$, the fixed points of $Phi_{alpha,0}(x) = alpha^x$ cannot be $alpha^0$ or $alpha^1$, so they must be at least $alpha^2$. In particular, they will be larger than $alpha$, and so $Phi_{alpha,alpha}(0)$, being a fixed point of $alpha^x$, will be larger than $alpha$ as well.



Question 2: Suppose $alpha > 1$, and $beta$ is a fixed point of the function $f(x) = alpha^x$. As above, we see that $beta > alpha$. Also, $beta = alpha^beta ge 2^beta ge beta$, so $beta = 2^beta$. Clearly $beta$ cannot be finite, and if $beta ge omega+1$ then $beta ge sup {omega+1, 2^{omega+1}, 2^{2^{omega+1}}, 2^{2^{2^{omega+1}}},cdots} = sup {omega+1, omega cdot 2, omega^2, omega^omega, omega^{omega^omega},cdots} = varepsilon_0$. Similarly, if $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma}+1$, then $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma+1}$. So $beta$ must belong to the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$. Going the other direction, if $beta$ is a member of ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$, and is larger than $alpha$, then $alpha beta = beta$, so $beta le alpha^beta le (2^alpha)^beta = 2^{(alpha beta)} = 2^beta = beta$, so $alpha^beta = beta$. Hence the members of the class ${Phi_{alpha,1}(x) | x in text{Ord}}$ are the members of the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$ that are larger than $alpha$. So for $alpha$ infinite, $Phi_{alpha,1}(x) = varphi_1 (gamma + x)$ for some ordinal $gamma$ with $gamma le alpha+1$. (We need $alpha+1$, since, for instance, $Phi_{varphi_2(0),1}(0) = varphi_1(varphi_2(0) + 1)$.)



We can now use induction: Given that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ for some $gamma le alpha+1$, we see that for any $zeta$, $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(zeta)$ satisfies $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$, and hence is larger than $gamma$. Also, $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x) ge varphi_beta(x) ge x$, so $x$ is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is larger than $gamma$ and is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma+x = x$, so $x = varphi_beta(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$. So the fixed points of $varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ are precisely the fixed points of $varphi_beta(x)$ that are greater than $gamma$, and so $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(x) = varphi_{beta+1}(gamma' + x)$, for some $gamma' le gamma+1$, with strict inequality when $gamma = alpha+1$; hence $gamma' le alpha+1$.



Furthermore, suppose $beta$ is a limit ordinal, and suppose, for all $delta < beta$, we have $Phi_{alpha,delta}(x) = varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x)$ for some ordinals $gamma_delta le alpha+1$. We see that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ must be greater than $alpha$, and also, since it is a fixed point of $varphi_delta$ for all $delta < beta$, must be of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is greater than $alpha$ and of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma_delta + x = x$ for all $delta < beta$. So for any $delta < beta$, $varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x) = varphi_delta(x) = x$, and so $x$ is of the form $Phi_{alpha,beta}(chi')$. So $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma_beta + x)$ for some $gamma_beta le alpha+1$.



So, by transfinite induction, there exists ordinals $gamma_{alpha,beta} le alpha+1$ such that, for all $alpha, beta, x,$ with $alpha$ infinite, we have $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta (gamma_{alpha,beta}+x)$. If $alpha, beta, x < Gamma_0$, then $gamma_{alpha,beta} + x < Gamma_0$, so $varphi_beta(gamma_beta+x) < Gamma_0$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$














    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3131163%2fmodifying-the-base-of-veblens-hierarchy-to-exceed-gamma-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1












    $begingroup$

    Question 1: If we include finite ordinals, then the only solution is $Phi_{1,1}(0) = 1$. (and $Phi_{0,0}(0) = 0$ if one chooses to set $0^0 = 0$) For $alpha > 1$, the fixed points of $Phi_{alpha,0}(x) = alpha^x$ cannot be $alpha^0$ or $alpha^1$, so they must be at least $alpha^2$. In particular, they will be larger than $alpha$, and so $Phi_{alpha,alpha}(0)$, being a fixed point of $alpha^x$, will be larger than $alpha$ as well.



    Question 2: Suppose $alpha > 1$, and $beta$ is a fixed point of the function $f(x) = alpha^x$. As above, we see that $beta > alpha$. Also, $beta = alpha^beta ge 2^beta ge beta$, so $beta = 2^beta$. Clearly $beta$ cannot be finite, and if $beta ge omega+1$ then $beta ge sup {omega+1, 2^{omega+1}, 2^{2^{omega+1}}, 2^{2^{2^{omega+1}}},cdots} = sup {omega+1, omega cdot 2, omega^2, omega^omega, omega^{omega^omega},cdots} = varepsilon_0$. Similarly, if $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma}+1$, then $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma+1}$. So $beta$ must belong to the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$. Going the other direction, if $beta$ is a member of ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$, and is larger than $alpha$, then $alpha beta = beta$, so $beta le alpha^beta le (2^alpha)^beta = 2^{(alpha beta)} = 2^beta = beta$, so $alpha^beta = beta$. Hence the members of the class ${Phi_{alpha,1}(x) | x in text{Ord}}$ are the members of the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$ that are larger than $alpha$. So for $alpha$ infinite, $Phi_{alpha,1}(x) = varphi_1 (gamma + x)$ for some ordinal $gamma$ with $gamma le alpha+1$. (We need $alpha+1$, since, for instance, $Phi_{varphi_2(0),1}(0) = varphi_1(varphi_2(0) + 1)$.)



    We can now use induction: Given that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ for some $gamma le alpha+1$, we see that for any $zeta$, $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(zeta)$ satisfies $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$, and hence is larger than $gamma$. Also, $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x) ge varphi_beta(x) ge x$, so $x$ is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is larger than $gamma$ and is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma+x = x$, so $x = varphi_beta(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$. So the fixed points of $varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ are precisely the fixed points of $varphi_beta(x)$ that are greater than $gamma$, and so $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(x) = varphi_{beta+1}(gamma' + x)$, for some $gamma' le gamma+1$, with strict inequality when $gamma = alpha+1$; hence $gamma' le alpha+1$.



    Furthermore, suppose $beta$ is a limit ordinal, and suppose, for all $delta < beta$, we have $Phi_{alpha,delta}(x) = varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x)$ for some ordinals $gamma_delta le alpha+1$. We see that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ must be greater than $alpha$, and also, since it is a fixed point of $varphi_delta$ for all $delta < beta$, must be of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is greater than $alpha$ and of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma_delta + x = x$ for all $delta < beta$. So for any $delta < beta$, $varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x) = varphi_delta(x) = x$, and so $x$ is of the form $Phi_{alpha,beta}(chi')$. So $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma_beta + x)$ for some $gamma_beta le alpha+1$.



    So, by transfinite induction, there exists ordinals $gamma_{alpha,beta} le alpha+1$ such that, for all $alpha, beta, x,$ with $alpha$ infinite, we have $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta (gamma_{alpha,beta}+x)$. If $alpha, beta, x < Gamma_0$, then $gamma_{alpha,beta} + x < Gamma_0$, so $varphi_beta(gamma_beta+x) < Gamma_0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      Question 1: If we include finite ordinals, then the only solution is $Phi_{1,1}(0) = 1$. (and $Phi_{0,0}(0) = 0$ if one chooses to set $0^0 = 0$) For $alpha > 1$, the fixed points of $Phi_{alpha,0}(x) = alpha^x$ cannot be $alpha^0$ or $alpha^1$, so they must be at least $alpha^2$. In particular, they will be larger than $alpha$, and so $Phi_{alpha,alpha}(0)$, being a fixed point of $alpha^x$, will be larger than $alpha$ as well.



      Question 2: Suppose $alpha > 1$, and $beta$ is a fixed point of the function $f(x) = alpha^x$. As above, we see that $beta > alpha$. Also, $beta = alpha^beta ge 2^beta ge beta$, so $beta = 2^beta$. Clearly $beta$ cannot be finite, and if $beta ge omega+1$ then $beta ge sup {omega+1, 2^{omega+1}, 2^{2^{omega+1}}, 2^{2^{2^{omega+1}}},cdots} = sup {omega+1, omega cdot 2, omega^2, omega^omega, omega^{omega^omega},cdots} = varepsilon_0$. Similarly, if $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma}+1$, then $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma+1}$. So $beta$ must belong to the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$. Going the other direction, if $beta$ is a member of ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$, and is larger than $alpha$, then $alpha beta = beta$, so $beta le alpha^beta le (2^alpha)^beta = 2^{(alpha beta)} = 2^beta = beta$, so $alpha^beta = beta$. Hence the members of the class ${Phi_{alpha,1}(x) | x in text{Ord}}$ are the members of the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$ that are larger than $alpha$. So for $alpha$ infinite, $Phi_{alpha,1}(x) = varphi_1 (gamma + x)$ for some ordinal $gamma$ with $gamma le alpha+1$. (We need $alpha+1$, since, for instance, $Phi_{varphi_2(0),1}(0) = varphi_1(varphi_2(0) + 1)$.)



      We can now use induction: Given that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ for some $gamma le alpha+1$, we see that for any $zeta$, $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(zeta)$ satisfies $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$, and hence is larger than $gamma$. Also, $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x) ge varphi_beta(x) ge x$, so $x$ is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is larger than $gamma$ and is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma+x = x$, so $x = varphi_beta(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$. So the fixed points of $varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ are precisely the fixed points of $varphi_beta(x)$ that are greater than $gamma$, and so $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(x) = varphi_{beta+1}(gamma' + x)$, for some $gamma' le gamma+1$, with strict inequality when $gamma = alpha+1$; hence $gamma' le alpha+1$.



      Furthermore, suppose $beta$ is a limit ordinal, and suppose, for all $delta < beta$, we have $Phi_{alpha,delta}(x) = varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x)$ for some ordinals $gamma_delta le alpha+1$. We see that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ must be greater than $alpha$, and also, since it is a fixed point of $varphi_delta$ for all $delta < beta$, must be of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is greater than $alpha$ and of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma_delta + x = x$ for all $delta < beta$. So for any $delta < beta$, $varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x) = varphi_delta(x) = x$, and so $x$ is of the form $Phi_{alpha,beta}(chi')$. So $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma_beta + x)$ for some $gamma_beta le alpha+1$.



      So, by transfinite induction, there exists ordinals $gamma_{alpha,beta} le alpha+1$ such that, for all $alpha, beta, x,$ with $alpha$ infinite, we have $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta (gamma_{alpha,beta}+x)$. If $alpha, beta, x < Gamma_0$, then $gamma_{alpha,beta} + x < Gamma_0$, so $varphi_beta(gamma_beta+x) < Gamma_0$.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Question 1: If we include finite ordinals, then the only solution is $Phi_{1,1}(0) = 1$. (and $Phi_{0,0}(0) = 0$ if one chooses to set $0^0 = 0$) For $alpha > 1$, the fixed points of $Phi_{alpha,0}(x) = alpha^x$ cannot be $alpha^0$ or $alpha^1$, so they must be at least $alpha^2$. In particular, they will be larger than $alpha$, and so $Phi_{alpha,alpha}(0)$, being a fixed point of $alpha^x$, will be larger than $alpha$ as well.



        Question 2: Suppose $alpha > 1$, and $beta$ is a fixed point of the function $f(x) = alpha^x$. As above, we see that $beta > alpha$. Also, $beta = alpha^beta ge 2^beta ge beta$, so $beta = 2^beta$. Clearly $beta$ cannot be finite, and if $beta ge omega+1$ then $beta ge sup {omega+1, 2^{omega+1}, 2^{2^{omega+1}}, 2^{2^{2^{omega+1}}},cdots} = sup {omega+1, omega cdot 2, omega^2, omega^omega, omega^{omega^omega},cdots} = varepsilon_0$. Similarly, if $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma}+1$, then $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma+1}$. So $beta$ must belong to the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$. Going the other direction, if $beta$ is a member of ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$, and is larger than $alpha$, then $alpha beta = beta$, so $beta le alpha^beta le (2^alpha)^beta = 2^{(alpha beta)} = 2^beta = beta$, so $alpha^beta = beta$. Hence the members of the class ${Phi_{alpha,1}(x) | x in text{Ord}}$ are the members of the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$ that are larger than $alpha$. So for $alpha$ infinite, $Phi_{alpha,1}(x) = varphi_1 (gamma + x)$ for some ordinal $gamma$ with $gamma le alpha+1$. (We need $alpha+1$, since, for instance, $Phi_{varphi_2(0),1}(0) = varphi_1(varphi_2(0) + 1)$.)



        We can now use induction: Given that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ for some $gamma le alpha+1$, we see that for any $zeta$, $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(zeta)$ satisfies $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$, and hence is larger than $gamma$. Also, $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x) ge varphi_beta(x) ge x$, so $x$ is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is larger than $gamma$ and is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma+x = x$, so $x = varphi_beta(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$. So the fixed points of $varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ are precisely the fixed points of $varphi_beta(x)$ that are greater than $gamma$, and so $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(x) = varphi_{beta+1}(gamma' + x)$, for some $gamma' le gamma+1$, with strict inequality when $gamma = alpha+1$; hence $gamma' le alpha+1$.



        Furthermore, suppose $beta$ is a limit ordinal, and suppose, for all $delta < beta$, we have $Phi_{alpha,delta}(x) = varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x)$ for some ordinals $gamma_delta le alpha+1$. We see that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ must be greater than $alpha$, and also, since it is a fixed point of $varphi_delta$ for all $delta < beta$, must be of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is greater than $alpha$ and of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma_delta + x = x$ for all $delta < beta$. So for any $delta < beta$, $varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x) = varphi_delta(x) = x$, and so $x$ is of the form $Phi_{alpha,beta}(chi')$. So $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma_beta + x)$ for some $gamma_beta le alpha+1$.



        So, by transfinite induction, there exists ordinals $gamma_{alpha,beta} le alpha+1$ such that, for all $alpha, beta, x,$ with $alpha$ infinite, we have $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta (gamma_{alpha,beta}+x)$. If $alpha, beta, x < Gamma_0$, then $gamma_{alpha,beta} + x < Gamma_0$, so $varphi_beta(gamma_beta+x) < Gamma_0$.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Question 1: If we include finite ordinals, then the only solution is $Phi_{1,1}(0) = 1$. (and $Phi_{0,0}(0) = 0$ if one chooses to set $0^0 = 0$) For $alpha > 1$, the fixed points of $Phi_{alpha,0}(x) = alpha^x$ cannot be $alpha^0$ or $alpha^1$, so they must be at least $alpha^2$. In particular, they will be larger than $alpha$, and so $Phi_{alpha,alpha}(0)$, being a fixed point of $alpha^x$, will be larger than $alpha$ as well.



        Question 2: Suppose $alpha > 1$, and $beta$ is a fixed point of the function $f(x) = alpha^x$. As above, we see that $beta > alpha$. Also, $beta = alpha^beta ge 2^beta ge beta$, so $beta = 2^beta$. Clearly $beta$ cannot be finite, and if $beta ge omega+1$ then $beta ge sup {omega+1, 2^{omega+1}, 2^{2^{omega+1}}, 2^{2^{2^{omega+1}}},cdots} = sup {omega+1, omega cdot 2, omega^2, omega^omega, omega^{omega^omega},cdots} = varepsilon_0$. Similarly, if $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma}+1$, then $beta ge varepsilon_{gamma+1}$. So $beta$ must belong to the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$. Going the other direction, if $beta$ is a member of ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$, and is larger than $alpha$, then $alpha beta = beta$, so $beta le alpha^beta le (2^alpha)^beta = 2^{(alpha beta)} = 2^beta = beta$, so $alpha^beta = beta$. Hence the members of the class ${Phi_{alpha,1}(x) | x in text{Ord}}$ are the members of the class ${omega} bigcup {varepsilon_beta}_{beta in text{Ord}}$ that are larger than $alpha$. So for $alpha$ infinite, $Phi_{alpha,1}(x) = varphi_1 (gamma + x)$ for some ordinal $gamma$ with $gamma le alpha+1$. (We need $alpha+1$, since, for instance, $Phi_{varphi_2(0),1}(0) = varphi_1(varphi_2(0) + 1)$.)



        We can now use induction: Given that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ for some $gamma le alpha+1$, we see that for any $zeta$, $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(zeta)$ satisfies $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$, and hence is larger than $gamma$. Also, $x = varphi_beta(gamma+x) ge varphi_beta(x) ge x$, so $x$ is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is larger than $gamma$ and is a fixed point of $varphi_beta$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma+x = x$, so $x = varphi_beta(x) = varphi_beta(gamma+x)$. So the fixed points of $varphi_beta(gamma+x)$ are precisely the fixed points of $varphi_beta(x)$ that are greater than $gamma$, and so $Phi_{alpha,beta+1}(x) = varphi_{beta+1}(gamma' + x)$, for some $gamma' le gamma+1$, with strict inequality when $gamma = alpha+1$; hence $gamma' le alpha+1$.



        Furthermore, suppose $beta$ is a limit ordinal, and suppose, for all $delta < beta$, we have $Phi_{alpha,delta}(x) = varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x)$ for some ordinals $gamma_delta le alpha+1$. We see that $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x)$ must be greater than $alpha$, and also, since it is a fixed point of $varphi_delta$ for all $delta < beta$, must be of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$. Going the other direction, if $x$ is greater than $alpha$ and of the form $varphi_beta(chi)$, then $x$, being an $varepsilon$-number, satisfies $gamma_delta + x = x$ for all $delta < beta$. So for any $delta < beta$, $varphi_delta(gamma_delta + x) = varphi_delta(x) = x$, and so $x$ is of the form $Phi_{alpha,beta}(chi')$. So $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta(gamma_beta + x)$ for some $gamma_beta le alpha+1$.



        So, by transfinite induction, there exists ordinals $gamma_{alpha,beta} le alpha+1$ such that, for all $alpha, beta, x,$ with $alpha$ infinite, we have $Phi_{alpha,beta}(x) = varphi_beta (gamma_{alpha,beta}+x)$. If $alpha, beta, x < Gamma_0$, then $gamma_{alpha,beta} + x < Gamma_0$, so $varphi_beta(gamma_beta+x) < Gamma_0$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Mar 21 at 5:08

























        answered Mar 21 at 4:52









        DeedlitDeedlit

        6,0221723




        6,0221723






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3131163%2fmodifying-the-base-of-veblens-hierarchy-to-exceed-gamma-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Nidaros erkebispedøme

            Birsay

            Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...