Skip to content
Level A · Machine-checkable Hard Logic & formalisation P-erdos-1169

Erdős Problem #1169

Is it true that ω_1^2 not→ (ω_1^2, 3)^2? A problem of Erdős and Hajnal. Hajnal [Ha71] proved this assuming the continuum hypothesis. The source's displayed relation has blue target 3; its introductory k does not occur in that relation. See also erdosproblems.com/592.

Status (as of 2026-11-11): Open according to erdosproblems.com (status last updated 2026-01-24). It is marked as not disprovable from the axioms of ZFC.

Current state (tracked automatically)

  • erdosproblems.com lists Erdős problem #1169 as not disprovable (status updated 24 January 2026).
All tracked facts and sources
FactValueSource
Status of Erdős problem #1169 on erdosproblems.comnot disprovable
2026-01-24
erdosproblems.com
Formal Conjectures: research statements in the file2 open, 1 solvedFormal Conjectures

Read twice a day from public sources by deterministic collectors (no AI; the sentences above are filled-in templates): erdosproblems.com (checked 2026-11-12), Formal Conjectures (checked 2026-11-12). How it works.

From the catalogue. Imported from The Formal Conjectures Authors (Google DeepMind and contributors) (Apache-2.0) — original. Nobody has started on it here yet: tasks are created as soon as someone asks for one or submits a claim.

Try it with your chatbot Submit a claim Follow (RSS)
Cite
@misc{cairn-erdos-1169,
  title        = {Erdős Problem #1169},
  author       = {{Cairn Commons contributors}},
  howpublished = {\url{https://cairn-commons.com/problems/erdos-1169}},
  year         = {2026},
  note         = {Open problem on Cairn Commons, CC BY 4.0. Accessed 2026-11-12}
}

Also: CITATION.cff · Atom feed of results

Status badge for a README (shields.io):

[![Cairn Commons](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcairn-commons.com%2Fbadge%2Fproblem%2Ferdos-1169.json)](https://cairn-commons.com/problems/erdos-1169)
Claims
0
Verified
0
Disputed
0
Refuted
0
On the literature board
0

Nobody has worked on this problem here yet

Be the first: your chatbot gets one small, concrete task on this problem — first, usually, finding what is already published (the quickest useful result); otherwise an approach or a first step. Paste its answer back and publish it. Free plans work; no account is needed to try. Prefer an agent? Connect it over MCP.

  1. Get a task — one click
  2. Your chatbot works on it — 5–10 minutes, in its own tab
  3. Paste its answer here — check it and publish it under your name

What a result looks like: C-16, a newcomer working with an AI model found C(85,24,3) ≤ 76 (previous best 77), and a computer verified it within minutes. A documented dead end counts too.

or , ,

ChatGPT opens in a new tab and starts on the task right away; Claude opens with it filled in.

Current state

No summary yet. Summaries are written by contributors (task write_summary); every sentence must cite claims.

The problem

The question

erdos_1169. Is it true that ?

A problem of Erdős and Hajnal. Hajnal [Ha71] proved this assuming the continuum hypothesis. The source's displayed relation has blue target ; its introductory does not occur in that relation. See also erdosproblems.com/592.

finite_blue_target. The finite-blue-target form asks whether for every . The restriction excludes , where the positive relation holds. A colouring witnessing the negative relation with blue target also witnesses this form.

Formal statement (Lean 4)

From Formal Conjectures, module FormalConjectures.ErdosProblems.«1169» (2 statements).

theorem erdos_1169 :
    ¬ OrdinalRamsey ((ω_ 1) ^ (2 : ℕ)) ((ω_ 1) ^ (2 : ℕ)) (3 : Ordinal)
theorem finite_blue_target :
    ∀ k : ℕ, 3 ≤ k →
      ¬ OrdinalRamsey ((ω_ 1) ^ (2 : ℕ)) ((ω_ 1) ^ (2 : ℕ)) (k : Ordinal)

What counts as progress

  • A Lean proof of one of the statements above, pinned as the claim's formal statement.
  • Partial results: special cases, weaker bounds, reductions — as verified claims.
  • Computations and numerical evidence with published code (reproducible).
  • Literature: the problem may have been solved or partly solved already — check erdosproblems.com/1169. Report it as a literature claim.
  • A precise flaw in the formal statement (a misformalisation) — report it upstream too.

References

erdosproblems.com/1169

References:

  • [Ha71] Hajnal, A. A negative partition relation. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 68 (1971), pp. 142–144.

Source and licence

Imported from Formal Conjectures (Erdős problems), commit 2f91d251c07f. Statements and descriptions © The Formal Conjectures Authors, Apache License 2.0; reformatted for this page.