Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Problem 70
claims/: The 1 claim page of Problem 70, one per claimant's result; the problem's standing derives from them.
Statement. Let be the ordinal of the real numbers, be any countable ordinal, and . Is it true that $\mathfrak{c}\to (\beta, n)_2^3$?
Formulation. The statement's "ordinal of the real numbers" is read as the
order type of the real line with its usual order, not as the initial
ordinal of the cardinal , because that is how the source reads it.
Erdős [Er87, Problem 3, p. 223] poses the question as an extension of
, which he calls an old result of Rado and
himself; that result is Theorem 31 of [ErRa56], proved for the uncountable order
types into which neither nor embeds, a hypothesis the
real line meets and the initial ordinal of the continuum does not. The site's
commentary credits the same relation. The statement in
formal-conjectures
poses the main question on with its usual order, after a correction
of 2026-09-12, while its variant omega_three uses the initial ordinal of the
continuum.
Status. Open. The site's label is OPEN. One accepted partial claim, Erdős and Rado 1956, settles the instances with and ; the question stays open.
Source. erdosproblems.com/70, accessed 2026-09-04. Cite as: T. F. Bloom, Erdős Problem #70, https://www.erdosproblems.com/70.
References.
- [Er87] Erdős, P., Some problems on finite and infinite graphs. Logic and combinatorics (Arcata, Calif., 1985), Contemp. Math. 65, Amer. Math. Soc. (1987), 223–228; Problem 3, p. 223. Library home: erdos_1987_problems_finite_infinite_graphs.
- [ErRa56] Erdős, P. and Rado, R., A partition calculus in set theory. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 62 (1956), no. 5, 427–489; Theorem 31, p. 447. Library home: erdos_1956_partition_calculus_set_theory.
- [Va99] Some of Paul's favorite problems, booklet for the conference "Paul Erdős and his mathematics", Budapest, July 1999; item 7.83, as the site cites it.
Formalization. Statement in formal-conjectures.
Current assessment
The question, in the site's formulation read as the Formulation says, asks
whether for every countable ordinal and every
finite , where is the order type of the real line. The site
labels the problem OPEN, and its only remark credits Erdős and Rado with
for every finite . That result is
Theorem 31, relation (30), of [ErRa56], and it is the accepted partial claim
Erdős and Rado 1956,
refereed in the Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society; it gives
for every , and so every instance with
and . Two families of instances are trivial. For
and every countable , a set of three reals all of whose triples are blue
is a single blue triple, so either some triple is blue or every triple is red,
and in the second case any set of reals of order type is
red-monochromatic. For and every , Ramsey's theorem applied
to the triples of an increasing -sequence of reals gives an infinite
homogeneous subset, which is either red, of order type and so
containing a set of order type , or blue and so containing points.
The remaining instances are open: with , of which
is the case the formal-conjectures file marks as the first open
one beyond Erdős and Rado, and with ; Erdős
[Er87] writes that he knows nothing about replacing by a larger
countable ordinal or by a larger . The formal-conjectures file's variant
omega_three, the one variant that carries a formal proof, concerns the initial
ordinal of the continuum and the trivial instance , so it gets no
claim page; its variant erdos_rado states the accepted result with its proof
left as sorry. Proof coverage: none of the proofs is reconstructed in this
corpus.
Search scope, 2026-10-07: the site's problem page (last edited 23 January 2026) and its discussion thread (no comments and no proof claims), [Er87], [ErRa56] and the formal-conjectures statement file at the commit linked under Formulation; no wider literature search is recorded.
Linked library material
These entries are derived from explicit links on library pages. They are navigation only and do not by themselves record mathematical progress.