TITLE: AC in group isomorphism between R and R^2
QUESTION [12 upvotes]: Using the axiom of choice, one can show that $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{R}^2$ are isomorphic as additive groups.  In particular, they are both vector spaces over $\mathbb{Q}$ and AC gives bases of these two vector spaces of cardinalities $c$ and $c\times c = c$, so they are isomorphic as vector spaces over $\mathbb{Q}$.
Is there a way to prove that $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{R}^2$ are isomorphic as additive groups which does not use AC?  Are there models of set theory in which these groups are not isomorphic?  I'm also curious whether there is a proof (perhaps using AC) which does not make use of this vector space machinery, though I'm fairly sure the above proof is the simplest.

REPLY [12 votes]: You cannot prove that $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ are isomorphic in $ZF$. To see this, note that the map $(x,y) \mapsto (x,0)$ is a nontrivial non-surjective additive endomorphism of $\mathbb{R}^{2}$. Assuming the existence of suitable large cardinals, every map $f: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ is measurable in $L(\mathbb{R})$ and it follows that the only additive endomorphisms of $\mathbb{R}$ in $L(\mathbb{R})$ are the maps $x \mapsto rx$ for some $r \in \mathbb{R}$. Thus $\mathbb{R} \not \cong \mathbb{R}^{2}$ in $L(\mathbb{R})$.
There is an interesting open problem related to your question of whether an isomorphism can be found which does not make use of the vector space machinery.
If we add a Ramsey ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$ to $L(\mathbb{R})$, then we obtain an interesting model $L(\mathbb{R})[\mathcal{U}]$ which contains the ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$ while still retaining some of the "nice" properties of $L(\mathbb{R})$. In particular, neither $\mathbb{R}$ nor $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ has a basis as a vector space over $\mathbb{Q}$ in $L(\mathbb{R})[\mathcal{U}]$ . However, it is unknown whether or not $\mathbb{R} \cong \mathbb{R}^{2}$ in $L(\mathbb{R})[\mathcal{U}]$. In other words, does an ultrafilter help in trying to construct such an isomorphism?

REPLY [6 votes]: Here's the way I like to do it:  
A group homomorphism with the property of Baire from one Polish group to another is automatically continuous.  Of course no bijection between your two groups is a homeomorphism.  Solovay provided a model (AC fails) in which every subset of a Polish space has the property of Baire, so in Solovay's model these two groups are not isomorphic.  
A more down-to-earth consequence of the result says: no map you can actually write down is a group isomorphism between these two groups.