|
General Set Theory
General set theory (GST) is George Boolos's (1998) name for a fragment of the axiomatic set theory Z. GST is sufficient for all mathematics not requiring infinite sets, and is the weakest known set theory whose theorems include the Peano axioms. Ontology The ontology of GST is identical to that of ZFC, and hence is thoroughly canonical. GST features a single primitive ontological notion, that of set, and a single ontological assumption, namely that all individuals in the universe of discourse (hence all mathematical objects) are sets. There is a single primitive binary relation, set membership; that set ''a'' is a member of set ''b'' is written ''a ∈ b'' (usually read "''a'' is an element of ''b''"). Axioms The symbolic axioms below are from Boolos (1998: 196), and govern how sets behave and interact. As with Z, the background logic for GST is first order logic with identity. Indeed, GST is the fragment of Z obtained by omitting the axioms Union, Power Set, Element ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
George Boolos
George Stephen Boolos (; September 4, 1940 – May 27, 1996) was an American philosopher and a mathematical logician who taught at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Life Boolos was of Greek-Jewish descent. He graduated with an A.B. in mathematics from Princeton University after completing a senior thesis, titled "A simple proof of Gödel's first incompleteness theorem", under the supervision of Raymond Smullyan. Oxford University awarded him the B.Phil. in 1963. In 1966, he obtained the first PhD in philosophy ever awarded by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, under the direction of Hilary Putnam. After teaching three years at Columbia University, he returned to MIT in 1969, where he spent the rest of his career. A charismatic speaker well known for his clarity and wit, he once delivered a lecture (1994b) giving an account of Gödel's second incompleteness theorem, employing only words of one syllable. At the end of his viva, Hilary Putnam asked him, "A ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Pairing Axiom
In axiomatic set theory and the branches of logic, mathematics, and computer science that use it, the axiom of pairing is one of the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. It was introduced by as a special case of his axiom of elementary sets. Formal statement In the formal language of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads: :\forall A \, \forall B \, \exists C \, \forall D \, \in C \iff (D = A \lor D = B)/math> In words: :Given any object ''A'' and any object ''B'', there is a set ''C'' such that, given any object ''D'', ''D'' is a member of ''C'' if and only if ''D'' is equal to ''A'' or ''D'' is equal to ''B''. Consequences As noted, what the axiom is saying is that, given two objects ''A'' and ''B'', we can find a set ''C'' whose members are exactly ''A'' and ''B''. We can use the axiom of extensionality to show that this set ''C'' is unique. We call the set ''C'' the ''pair'' of ''A'' and ''B'', and denote it . Thus the essence of the axiom is: :Any two o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Relation Algebra
In mathematics and abstract algebra, a relation algebra is a residuated Boolean algebra expanded with an involution called converse, a unary operation. The motivating example of a relation algebra is the algebra 2''X'' 2 of all binary relations on a set ''X'', that is, subsets of the cartesian square ''X''2, with ''R''•''S'' interpreted as the usual composition of binary relations ''R'' and ''S'', and with the converse of ''R'' as the converse relation. Relation algebra emerged in the 19th-century work of Augustus De Morgan and Charles Peirce, which culminated in the algebraic logic of Ernst Schröder. The equational form of relation algebra treated here was developed by Alfred Tarski and his students, starting in the 1940s. Tarski and Givant (1987) applied relation algebra to a variable-free treatment of axiomatic set theory, with the implication that mathematics founded on set theory could itself be conducted without variables. Definition A relation algebra is a ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cantor's Paradox
In set theory, Cantor's paradox states that there is no set of all cardinalities. This is derived from the theorem that there is no greatest cardinal number. In informal terms, the paradox is that the collection of all possible "infinite sizes" is not only infinite, but so infinitely large that its own infinite size cannot be any of the infinite sizes in the collection. The difficulty is handled in axiomatic set theory by declaring that this collection is not a set but a proper class; in von Neumann–Bernays–Gödel set theory it follows from this and the axiom of limitation of size that this proper class must be in bijection with the class of all sets. Thus, not only are there infinitely many infinities, but this infinity is larger than any of the infinities it enumerates. This paradox is named for Georg Cantor, who is often credited with first identifying it in 1899 (or between 1895 and 1897). Like a number of "paradoxes" it is not actually contradictory but merely indicative ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Naïve Set Theory
Naive set theory is any of several theories of sets used in the discussion of the foundations of mathematics. Unlike axiomatic set theories, which are defined using formal logic, naive set theory is defined informally, in natural language. It describes the aspects of mathematical sets familiar in discrete mathematics (for example Venn diagrams and symbolic reasoning about their Boolean algebra), and suffices for the everyday use of set theory concepts in contemporary mathematics. Sets are of great importance in mathematics; in modern formal treatments, most mathematical objects (numbers, relations, functions, etc.) are defined in terms of sets. Naive set theory suffices for many purposes, while also serving as a stepping stone towards more formal treatments. Method A ''naive theory'' in the sense of "naive set theory" is a non-formalized theory, that is, a theory that uses natural language to describe sets and operations on sets. Such theory treats sets as platonic absolute ob ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Schema
In mathematical logic, an axiom schema (plural: axiom schemata or axiom schemas) generalizes the notion of axiom. Formal definition An axiom schema is a formula in the metalanguage of an axiomatic system, in which one or more schematic variables appear. These variables, which are metalinguistic constructs, stand for any term or subformula of the system, which may or may not be required to satisfy certain conditions. Often, such conditions require that certain variables be free, or that certain variables not appear in the subformula or term. Examples Two well known instances of axiom schemata are the: * induction schema that is part of Peano's axioms for the arithmetic of the natural numbers; * axiom schema of replacement that is part of the standard ZFC axiomatization of set theory. Czesław Ryll-Nardzewski proved that Peano arithmetic cannot be finitely axiomatized, and Richard Montague proved that ZFC cannot be finitely axiomatized. Hence, the axiom schemata cannot be ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Empty Set
In axiomatic set theory, the axiom of empty set, also called the axiom of null set and the axiom of existence, is a statement that asserts the existence of a set with no elements. It is an axiom of Kripke–Platek set theory and the variant of general set theory that Burgess (2005) calls "ST," and a demonstrable truth in Zermelo set theory and Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory In set theory, Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, named after mathematicians Ernst Zermelo and Abraham Fraenkel, is an axiomatic system that was proposed in the early twentieth century in order to formulate a theory of sets free of paradoxes suc ..., with or without the axiom of choice. Formal statement In the formal language of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads: :\exists A\, \forall x\, (x \notin A). Or, alternatively, \exists x\, \lnot \exists y\, (y \in x). In words: :Existential quantification, There is a Set (mathematics), set such that no element is a member of it. Interpretation ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Adjoint Functor
In mathematics, specifically category theory, adjunction is a relationship that two functors may exhibit, intuitively corresponding to a weak form of equivalence between two related categories. Two functors that stand in this relationship are known as adjoint functors, one being the left adjoint and the other the right adjoint. Pairs of adjoint functors are ubiquitous in mathematics and often arise from constructions of "optimal solutions" to certain problems (i.e., constructions of objects having a certain universal property), such as the construction of a free group on a set in algebra, or the construction of the Stone–Čech compactification of a topological space in topology. By definition, an adjunction between categories \mathcal and \mathcal is a pair of functors (assumed to be covariant) :F: \mathcal \rightarrow \mathcal and G: \mathcal \rightarrow \mathcal and, for all objects c in \mathcal and d in \mathcal, a bijection between the respective morphism sets :\ma ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Adjunction
In mathematical set theory, the axiom of adjunction states that for any two sets ''x'', ''y'' there is a set ''w'' = ''x'' ∪ given by "adjoining" the set ''y'' to the set ''x''. It is stated as :\forall x. \forall y. \exists w. \forall z. \big( z \in w \leftrightarrow (z \in x \lor z=y) \big). introduced the axiom of adjunction as one of the axioms for a system of set theory that he introduced in about 1929. It is a weak axiom, used in some weak systems of set theory such as general set theory or finitary set theory. The adjunction operation is also used as one of the operations of primitive recursive set functions. Interpretability of arithmetic Tarski and Szmielew showed that Robinson arithmetic () can be interpreted in a weak set theory whose axioms are extensionality, the existence of the empty set, and the axiom of adjunction . In fact, empty set and adjunction alone (without extensionality) suffice to interpret . (They are mutually interpreta ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Russell's Paradox
In mathematical logic, Russell's paradox (also known as Russell's antinomy) is a set-theoretic paradox published by the British philosopher and mathematician, Bertrand Russell, in 1901. Russell's paradox shows that every set theory that contains an unrestricted comprehension principle leads to contradictions. According to the unrestricted comprehension principle, for any sufficiently well-defined property, there is the set of all and only the objects that have that property. Let ''R'' be the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. (This set is sometimes called "the Russell set".) If ''R'' is not a member of itself, then its definition entails that it is a member of itself; yet, if it is a member of itself, then it is not a member of itself, since it is the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. The resulting contradiction is Russell's paradox. In symbols: : Let R = \. Then R \in R \iff R \not \in R. Russell also showed that a version of the paradox co ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Restriction (mathematics)
In mathematics, the restriction of a function f is a new function, denoted f\vert_A or f , obtained by choosing a smaller domain A for the original function f. The function f is then said to extend f\vert_A. Formal definition Let f : E \to F be a function from a set E to a set F. If a set A is a subset of E, then the restriction of f to A is the function _A : A \to F given by _A(x) = f(x) for x \in A. Informally, the restriction of f to A is the same function as f, but is only defined on A. If the function f is thought of as a relation (x,f(x)) on the Cartesian product E \times F, then the restriction of f to A can be represented by its graph, :G(_A) = \ = G(f)\cap (A\times F), where the pairs (x,f(x)) represent ordered pairs in the graph G. Extensions A function F is said to be an ' of another function f if whenever x is in the domain of f then x is also in the domain of F and f(x) = F(x). That is, if \operatorname f \subseteq \operatorname F and F\big\vert_ = f. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
