A set is uncountable if there is no bijection between and . Equivalently, there is no injection from to .
In set theories without the axiom of choice, such as Zermelo Frankel set theory without choice (ZF), it can be consistent that there is a cardinal_number that is incomparable to . That is, there is no injection from to nor from to . In this case, cardinality is not a total order, so it doesn't make sense to think of uncountability as "larger" than . In the presence of choice, cardinality is a total order, so an uncountable set can be thought of as "larger" than a countable set.
Countability in one model is not necessarily countability in another. By Skolem's Paradox, there is a model of set theory where its power set of the naturals, denoted is countable when considered outside the model. Of course, it is a theorem that is uncountable, but that is within the model. That is, there is a bijection that is not inside the model (when is considered as a set, its graph), and there is no such bijection inside . This means that (un)countability is not absolute.
If you enjoyed this explanation, consider exploring some of Arbital's other featured content!
Arbital is made by people like you, if you think you can explain a mathematical concept then consider contributing to Arbital!