Satan, Cantor, and Infinity

Raymond M. Smullyan

The College Mathematics Journal, Vol. 16, No. 2. (Mar., 1985), pp. 118-121.

Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0746-8342%28198503%2916%3A2%3C118%3ASCAI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U

The College Mathematics Journal is currently published by Mathematical Association of America.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/maa.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.org
Fri Sep 28 01:39:30 2007
Satan, Cantor, and Infinity
Raymond M. Smullyan

Raymond Smullyan received his B.S. from the University of

Chicago in 1955 and his Ph.D. from Princeton in 1959. His
special areas of interest are logic and recursion theory,
about which he has numerous publications. A small sample
of his authored books include: Theory of Formal Systems
(1961), First Order Logic (1968), The Tao is Silent (1978),
What is the Name of This Book? (1978), The Chess Myster-
ies of Sherlock Holmes (1979), This Book Needs No Title
(1980), The Chess Mysteries of the Arabian Nights (1981),
The Lady or the Tiger (1982), Alice in Puzzleland (1982), 500
B.C. and Other Philosophical Phantasies (1983). Professor
Smullyan has been a professional pianist. He is an amateur
astronomer with expertise in making telescopes, and he
worked his way through college as a professsional magi-
cian.

"I have been having a lot of fun with some of our victims," said Satan to Beelzebub,
as he rubbed his hands in glee. "In each case I tell the victim that I am thinking of
one and only one object out of an infinite set of objects. Each day the victim is
allowed one and only one guess as to what the object could be. If and when he
guesses it, he goes free. This is the general format of these tests. In some cases the
victim has been clever enough tc devise a strategy to win his freedom, in other
cases, not. Well, tomorrow I am expecting a new victim and I will arrange matters
so he can never go free!"
"What will you do?" asked Beelzebub.
"I have written down the name of a set of positive whole numbers," said Satan.
"Each day he will be allowed to name one and only one set and if he ever names
my set, he can go free. But he will never go free!" said Satan shrieking with delight.
"Why?" asked Beelzebub.

"Well just look at what I have written!" said Satan.

THE SET O F ALL NUMBERS n SUCH THAT n DOES NOT BELONG

I TO THE SET NAMED ON THE nth DAY. I
"I don't understand!" said Beelzebub.
"I thought you wouldn't, blockhead! He can't possibly name my set on any day,
because for each positive integer n, the set he names on the nth day is different from
my set, since one of these two sets contains the number n and the other doesn't! It's
as simple as that!"
"This sounds like fun!" said Beelzebub.
 Well, it so happened that the next victim was a prize student of Georg Cantor!
He not only knew his mathematics of infinity perfectly, but was also an expert in
semantics and law. In fact he had originally planned to go into law, until he fell
under Cantor's magnetic sway and decided instead to go into logic and mathemat-
ics.
"Before I sign any contract," said the student to Satan, "I want to be sure that
I'm absolutely clear as to the terms."
"I've already told you," said Satan, "that I have written down the name of some
set of positive integers and it is right here in this envelope with my Royal Seal. Each
day you are allowed to name one and only one set. If and when you name the set
written here, you go free. It's as simple as that!"
"I already understood that," replied the student, "but there are several questions
that need to be answered. First, suppose that on a given day I name the same set
that you have written, but my description of the set is different from yours. Any set
can be described in many different ways. For example, suppose you have written:
"The set whose only member is the number 2," but on some day I say: "The set of
all even prime numbers." Now, the two sets are really the same, since 2 is the onll,
even prime number. Yet the descriptions are quite different. What happens then?"
"Oh, in that case you win," replied Satan. "I do not demand that our descriptions
be the same, but only that they describe the same set."
"But that raises a serious problem!" said the student. "It is not always a simple
matter to determine whether two descriptions name the same set. Suppose on a
certain day I name a set and you reply: "No, that's not the set I have in mind," but
I have reason to believe it really is the same set, only you have described it
differently. What happens then?"
"In that case," said Satan, "you are allowed to challenge me. Now, a challenge is
a very serious matter and you should think twice before making it. It might win you
instant freedom, or it might doom you here forever!"
"Just what do you mean by a challenge?'asked the student.
"You challenge me to open the envelope and show you what I have written. If
you can prove that the two descriptions-yours and mine-are really of the same
set, you win the challenge and go free. But if I can prove that the descriptions name
different sets, then you have lost the challenge and your right to name any more sets
in the future is cancelled. There is then no way you can ever escape. Remember well
that after a challenge, you are not allowed to name any more sets."
"That's clear enough," said the student, "but now comes a second point. How do
I know that you have really written the name of a set in this envelope?"
"You doubt my word?'asked Satan.
"Oh, not at all; I don't doubt for a moment that you have written something in
this envelope which you believe to be a genuine description of a set, but it has
happened in the history of mathematics that what at first sight appeared to be a
genuine description has turned out not to describe any set at all-in other words,
that there really is no set answering such a description. Such "descriptions" are
what logicians call pseudo-descriptions. They appear to describe a set, but really
don't. Now suppose that at a certain stage, I have reason to suspect that what you
have written in the envelope is not a genuine description, but only a pseudo-
description. What happens then?"
"If on any day you suspect that I have written only a pseudo-description,"
replied Satan, "then again you may challenge me. I open the envelope and show
you what I have written. If you can prove that it is only a pseudo-description, you
win the challenge and go free. But if I can prove that it really is a genuine
description, then you lose the challenge and again your right to name any more sets
in the future is cancelled. I must earnestly remind you that after a challenge, you
may not name any more sets."
"That point is now clear," said the student. "One last thing: Are you willing to
have it written in the contract that if at any time you violate any of the conditions,
then I go free?"
"Yes," replied Satan, "provided that you are willing to have it written that if at
any time you violate any of the conditions, then you stay here forever."
"Agreed!" said the student.
The contract was then drawn up by Beelzebub and duly executed by both
parties.
"Good!" said Satan. "When would you like to begin?"
"Today's as good a day as any," said the student. Let this be the first day of the
test.
"Very well then, name a set of positive integers!"
"The set of all n such that n does not belong to the set I name on the nth day,"
said the student. "And now I challenge you to open the envelope."
"Good grief!" cried Satan, "I never thought of that!"
"Open the envelope!" demanded the student.
Satan had to open the envelope, and of course he had written the same thing.
"So I go free!" said the student.
"Not so fast, young man!" said Satan. "You have not really named a set; you
have done just what you accused me of possibly doing; you have given only a
pseudo-description, not a genuine description!"
"Why?" asked the student.
"Because the assumption that you have named a set leads to a logical contradic-
tion: Suppose you have named a set. Then this set is the set you have named on the
first day. Now, the number 1 belongs to this set if and only if it doesn't belong to
the set named on the first day, but since this set is the set named on the first day,
then 1 belongs to this set if and only if it doesn't. This is a clear contradiction and
the only way out of the contradiction is that you have not really named a set."
"I'm glad you realize this," said the student, "because by the same token, you
have failed to name a set."
"Now, just a minute!" said Satan. "The genuineness of my description is
predicated on the assumption that you name one and only one set each day, as
you're supposed to. So far, you have not yet named a set today, so I now command
you to name a set."
"Oh, I have no intention of naming any sets today."
"What?'cried Satan, unable to believe his ears.
"It doesn't say anywhere in the contract that I must name a set on each day; it
says that on each day I am allowed to name a set. Well, it so happens that today I
don't choose to name any set."
"Oh, really!" shrieked Satan; "you refuse to name a set today, eh? Well I'll force
you to name a set today, and tomorrow I'll again force you to name a set, and the
day after and the day after, and so on throughout all eternity. You have no idea
how terrible my methods are!"
"Oh, you can't do that," said the student, "I've already challenged you and it
says quite explicitly in the contract that after a challenge, I'm not allowed to name
any more sets."
Epilogue-Of course. Satan had to set the student free. The student immediately
ascended to paradise and embraced his beloved master Georg Cantor. The two had
a delightful chuckle over the entire affair.
120
 "You realize," said Cantor, "that you didn't have to be this elaborate; you didn't
have to start the procedure by giving a pseudo-description. You could have started
by simply saying: "I challenge you!" After the challenge, you wouldn't be allowed
to name any sets, which would automatically make Satan's 'description' a mere
pseudo-description."
"Oh, I realized that," said the student, "I just thought I'd have a little fun with
him."
Discussion and Moral-Satan used Cantor's famous diagonal device to prove that
the power set of a set N has higher cardinality than N (see [I], pp. 14, 15 for a proof
of Cantor's theorem, or [2], pp. 220-224, for a popular, though equally rigorous
version). The student, of course, rightfully guessed that Satan would try and pull
such a Cantorian trick. Several people have asked me whether the expression: "The
set of all n such that n does not belong to the set named on day n" is a genuine
description or not. The answer is that it is a genuine description if and only if on
each day there is one and only one set named on that day. If the student would fail
to name a set on so much as one day, that would be enough to nullify the
meaningfulness of Satan's description. Or if the student would name more than one
set on a given day, that would also invalidate Satan's description. But if the student
names one and only one set on each day, then Satan's description is perfectly well
defined. [A curious thing, though, about this description is that after no finite
number of days, can it be known that Satan wrote a genuine description, unless it
could somehow be known that the student would name one and only one set each
day.]
Satan really made a very poor contract! If he had required (instead of just
allowed) the student to name one and only one set each day and if he had just
deleted this business about the student not being allowed to name any more sets
after a challenge, he would obviously have won. Had he done that, then it would
indeed have been logically impossible for the student ever to name Satan's set. But
as the contract stands, a mere challenge on the part of the student disallows him to
name any more sets, which in turn nullifies the genuiness of Satan's "description."
The moral of the story is that even fallen angels might benefit from a good
course in mathematical logic.

"I'm beginning to understand eternity, but infinity is still beyond me."

REFERENCES
1. Stephen C. Kleene, Introduction to Metamathematics, D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., Princeton,
NJ, 1952.
2. Raymond M. Smullyan, What Is The Name Of This Book?, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
1978.