1. Infinite exponents
Last lecture we showed that for any
Later, we will see that for any
and any
there is
such that
On the other hand (recall we are assuming choice), there are no nontrivial positive partition relations
with
infinite.
(To avoid vacuously true statements, we are always assuming implicitly that requires
for at least one
)
Proof: It is enough to show that In effect, if
holds and
we may assume that
is regular, so any countable subset
of
is bounded, and the ordinal
is still strictly below
For let
denote the subset of
consisting of its first
many members.
Now, given let
be the function
If
is homogeneous for
and of size
then
is homogeneous for
In effect, let
so
If
then
by homogeneity of
This shows that for
infinite implies that there is some
such that
so it is enough to show that the latter never holds. In fact, we cannot even have
(Recall our convention that
denotes the order type and
the size.)
For this, let be an arbitrary infinite cardinal, and let
be a well-ordering of
Define
by
iff
is the
-least member of
and
otherwise.
If is homogeneous for
and
is the
-least member of
then
so
is
-homogeneous. Now consider any infinite sequence
of infinite subsets of
Since
for all
we must have that
contradicting that
is a well-order.
In the presence of the axiom of choice, Theorem 1 completely settles the question of what infinite exponent partition relations hold. Without choice, the situation is different.