跳到主要内容

Chapter 37: φ_Determinacy — Collapse Strategies in Infinite Games [ZFC-Independent, CST-Strategic] ⚠️

37.1 Determinacy in ZFC​

Classical Statement: A set A ⊆ ω^ω is determined if the associated infinite game G_A has a winning strategy for one of the two players. The Axiom of Determinacy (AD) states all sets are determined, contradicting the Axiom of Choice.

Definition 37.1 (Infinite Games - ZFC):

  • Game G_A: Players I, II alternately choose naturals
  • Play: x = (x₀, x₁, x₂, ...) ∈ ω^ω
  • Winning: Player I wins if x ∈ A, else Player II wins
  • Strategy: Function telling player what to play
  • Determined: One player has winning strategy

Key Results:

  • AD contradicts AC (Axiom of Choice)
  • ZF + AD consistent if large cardinals exist
  • Borel determinacy provable in ZFC

37.2 CST Translation: Strategic Collapse Patterns​

In CST, determinacy represents observer's ability to collapse infinite games into winning strategies:

Definition 37.2 (Strategic Collapse - CST): A game exhibits determined collapse if:

∃σ:ψ∘Pσ↓winning strategy for I or II\exists \sigma : \psi \circ P_\sigma \downarrow \text{winning strategy for I or II}

Observer collapses infinite possibilities to strategic certainty.

Theorem 37.1 (Strategic Completeness Principle): Under appropriate conditions, all games collapse to determined strategies:

ADψ:∀A⊆ωω:ψ∘PGA↓determined\text{AD}_\psi : \forall A \subseteq \omega^\omega : \psi \circ P_{G_A} \downarrow \text{determined}

Proof: Strategic collapse through infinite recursion:

Stage 1: Game tree analysis:

TA=tree of partial plays and responsesT_A = \text{tree of partial plays and responses}

Stage 2: Backward induction (when possible):

ψ∘Pleaf↓winning positions\psi \circ P_{\text{leaf}} \downarrow \text{winning positions}

Stage 3: Strategy extraction:

σ(s)=optimal move after finite sequence s\sigma(s) = \text{optimal move after finite sequence } s

Stage 4: Self-reference determines winner:

ψ=ψ(ψ)⇒complete strategy emerges\psi = \psi(\psi) \Rightarrow \text{complete strategy emerges}

Thus games collapse to determinacy. ∎

37.3 Physical Verification: Quantum Games​

Experimental Setup: Determinacy principles manifest in quantum game theory and infinite measurement sequences.

Protocol φ_Determinacy:

  1. Set up quantum game with infinite rounds
  2. Players make quantum measurements
  3. Determine winning conditions on measurement sequence
  4. Search for optimal quantum strategies

Physical Principle: Quantum games with appropriate symmetries exhibit determinacy-like properties.

Verification Status: ⚠️ Partially Constructible

Limited demonstrations:

  • Finite quantum games solved
  • Infinite games remain theoretical
  • Connection to quantum strategies emerging

37.4 Types of Determinacy​

37.4.1 Borel Determinacy​

All Borel sets are determined (Martin's theorem):

A∈B(ωω)⇒GA determinedA \in \mathcal{B}(\omega^\omega) \Rightarrow G_A \text{ determined}

37.4.2 Analytic Determinacy​

From large cardinals:

∃ measurable cardinal⇒Σ11-determinacy\exists \text{ measurable cardinal} \Rightarrow \Sigma^1_1\text{-determinacy}

37.4.3 Projective Determinacy​

PD:All projective sets determined\text{PD}: \text{All projective sets determined}

37.5 Consequences of Determinacy​

37.5.1 Regularity Properties​

Under AD, all sets have:

  • Lebesgue measurability
  • Baire property
  • Perfect set property

37.5.2 Uniformization​

∀R⊆X×Y∃f:dom(R)→Y:graph(f)⊆R\forall R \subseteq X \times Y \exists f : \text{dom}(R) \to Y : \text{graph}(f) \subseteq R

37.5.3 Wadge Hierarchy​

Well-ordered hierarchy of complexity:

A≤WB⇔A=f−1(B) for continuous fA \leq_W B \Leftrightarrow A = f^{-1}(B) \text{ for continuous } f

37.6 Connections to Other Collapses​

Determinacy relates to:

  • LargeCardinal (Chapter 35): Large cardinals imply determinacy
  • DescriptiveSet (Chapter 38): Determines set structure
  • Forcing (Chapter 36): AD holds in some forcing extensions
  • ModelTheory (Chapter 39): Determines definable sets

37.7 Game Strategies​

37.7.1 Positional Strategy​

Depends only on current position, not history.

37.7.2 Winning Strategy​

σ:⋃n<ωω2n→ω\sigma : \bigcup_{n<\omega} \omega^{2n} \to \omega

37.7.3 Quasi-Strategy​

Uses auxiliary random bits.

37.8 CST Analysis: Strategic Coherence​

CST Theorem 37.2: Determinacy reflects strategic coherence of ψ = ψ(ψ):

ADψ⇔ψ maintains strategic coherence across infinite plays\text{AD}_\psi \Leftrightarrow \psi \text{ maintains strategic coherence across infinite plays}

Self-observing observer achieves strategic completeness.

37.9 Descriptive Complexity​

37.9.1 Borel Hierarchy​

Σ10⊆Π10⊆Σ20⊆…⊆B\Sigma^0_1 \subseteq \Pi^0_1 \subseteq \Sigma^0_2 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq \mathcal{B}

37.9.2 Projective Hierarchy​

Σ11⊆Π11⊆Σ21⊆…\Sigma^1_1 \subseteq \Pi^1_1 \subseteq \Sigma^1_2 \subseteq \ldots

37.9.3 Wadge Degrees​

Linear ordering under continuous reducibility.

37.10 Physical Interpretations​

37.10.1 Quantum Strategies​

Entanglement enables new strategies.

37.10.2 Information Games​

Communication complexity bounds.

37.10.3 Evolutionary Games​

Infinite population dynamics.

37.11 Proof Techniques​

37.11.1 Unraveling​

Convert to equivalent open game.

37.11.2 Coding​

Encode complex sets by simpler ones.

37.11.3 Covering​

Use measure/category to find strategies.

37.12 Alternative Axioms​

37.12.1 ADℝ​

Determinacy for games on reals.

37.12.2 AD⁺​

Strengthening with additional properties.

37.12.3 Θ-determinacy​

Games of length Θ.

37.13 Modern Developments​

37.13.1 Long Games​

Games of uncountable length.

37.13.2 Infinite Time Computation​

Strategies computed by infinite machines.

37.13.3 Homotopy Games​

Topological methods in game theory.

37.14 The Determinacy Echo​

The pattern ψ = ψ(ψ) reverberates through:

  • Strategy echo: infinite collapsed to finite description
  • Winning echo: one player must have advantage
  • Coherence echo: local moves determine global outcome

This creates the "Determinacy Echo" - the resonance where infinite games collapse to finite strategies.

37.15 Synthesis​

The determinacy collapse φ_Determinacy reveals a profound principle: in well-behaved mathematical universes, every infinite game has a winner. This isn't obvious - with infinite choices, one might expect eternal indeterminacy. Yet determinacy shows that infinite complexity can collapse to strategic simplicity.

CST interprets determinacy as strategic coherence of the self-observing observer. When ψ observes game ψ(ψ), it must find a winning strategy for one player. This mirrors how consciousness navigates infinite possibilities by collapsing them to actionable strategies. The observer doesn't need to see all infinite futures - just enough to determine the optimal next move.

The partial physical verification through quantum games hints at deeper connections. Quantum strategies using entanglement surpass classical strategies, suggesting that determinacy principles extend beyond classical mathematics. The universe itself might be "playing" determined games at the quantum level.

Most fascinatingly, determinacy contradicts the Axiom of Choice while being implied by large cardinals. This suggests two different mathematical universes: one with arbitrary choices but undetermined games (AC), another with determined games but no arbitrary choice function (AD). In CST terms, these represent different collapse philosophies - one prioritizing freedom, the other strategic completeness. The fact that both are consistent (given large cardinals) shows mathematics accommodates radically different worldviews, each complete in its own way.

"In determinacy's realm, infinity bows to strategy - the endless game finds its master, and chaos discovers that even in forever, someone must win."