proof of every filter is contained in an ultrafilter (alternate proof)
Let be the family of filters over which are finer than , under the partial order of inclusion.
Claim 1. Every chain in has an upper bound also in .
Proof.
Take any chain in , and consider the set . Then is also a filter: it cannot contain the empty set, since no filter in the chain does; the intersection of two sets in must be present in the filters of ; and is closed under supersets because every filter in is. Obviously is finer than . β
So we conclude, by Zornβs lemma, that must have a maximal filter say , which must contain . All we need to show is that is an ultrafilter. Now, for any filter , and any set , we must have:
Claim 2. Either or (or both) are a filter subbasis.
Proof.
We prove by contradiction that at least one of or must have the finite intersection property. If neither has the finite intersection property, then for some we must have
But then
and so does not have the finite intersection property either. This cannot be, since is a filter. β
Now, by Claim 2, if were not an ultrafilter, i.e., if for some subset of we would have neither nor in , then the filter generated or would be finer than , and then would not be maximal.
So is an ultrafilter containing , as intended.
Title | proof of every filter is contained in an ultrafilter (alternate proof) |
---|---|
Canonical name | ProofOfEveryFilterIsContainedInAnUltrafilteralternateProof |
Date of creation | 2013-03-22 17:52:54 |
Last modified on | 2013-03-22 17:52:54 |
Owner | brunoloff (19748) |
Last modified by | brunoloff (19748) |
Numerical id | 8 |
Author | brunoloff (19748) |
Entry type | Proof |
Classification | msc 54A20 |