Ramsey's Theorem - Infinite Version Implies The Finite

Infinite Version Implies The Finite

It is possible to deduce the finite Ramsey theorem from the infinite version by a proof by contradiction. Suppose the finite Ramsey theorem is false. Then there exist integers such that for every integer, there exists a -colouring of without a monochromatic set of size . Let denote the -colourings of without a monochromatic set of size .

For any k, the restriction of a colouring in to (by ignoring the colour of all sets containing ) is a colouring in . Define to be the colourings in which are restrictions of colourings in . Since is not empty, neither is .

Similarly, the restriction of any colouring in is in, allowing one to define as the set of all such restrictions, a non-empty set. Continuing so, define for all integers .

Now, for any integer, and each set is non-empty. Furthermore, is finite as . It follows that the intersection of all of these sets is non-empty, and let . Then every colouring in is the restriction of a colouring in . Therefore, by unrestricting a colouring in to a colouring in, and continuing doing so, one constructs a colouring of without any monochromatic set of size . This contradicts the infinite Ramsey theorem.

If a suitable topological viewpoint is taken, this argument becomes a standard compactness argument showing that the infinite version of the theorem implies the finite version.

Read more about this topic:  Ramsey's Theorem

Famous quotes containing the words infinite, version, implies and/or finite:

    What means the fact—which is so common, so universal—that some soul that has lost all hope for itself can inspire in another listening soul an infinite confidence in it, even while it is expressing its despair?
    Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)

    I should think that an ordinary copy of the King James version would have been good enough for those Congressmen.
    Calvin Coolidge (1872–1933)

    An artist is an artist only because of his exquisite sense of beauty, a sense which shows him intoxicating pleasures, but which at the same time implies and contains an equally exquisite sense of all deformities and all disproportions.
    Charles Baudelaire (1821–1867)

    Are not all finite beings better pleased with motions relative than absolute?
    Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)