|
∈-induction
In axiomatic set theory, set theory, \in-induction, also called epsilon-induction or set-induction, is a principle that can be used to prove that all Set (mathematics), sets satisfy a given property. Considered as an axiom schema, axiomatic principle, it is called the axiom schema of set induction. The principle implies transfinite induction and recursion. It may also be studied in a general context of induction on well-founded relation#Induction and recursion, well-founded relations. Statement The schema is for any given property \psi of sets and states that, if for every set x, the truth of \psi(x) follows from the truth of \psi for all elements of x, then this property \psi holds for all sets. In symbols: :\forall x. \Big(\big(\forall (y \in x). \psi(y)\big)\,\to\,\psi(x)\Big)\,\to\,\forall z. \psi(z) Note that for the "bottom case" where x denotes the empty set \, the subexpression \forall(y\in x).\psi(y) is vacuously true for all propositions and so that implication is pro ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Transfinite Induction
Transfinite induction is an extension of mathematical induction to well-ordered sets, for example to sets of ordinal numbers or cardinal numbers. Its correctness is a theorem of ZFC. Induction by cases Let P(\alpha) be a property defined for all ordinals \alpha. Suppose that whenever P(\beta) is true for all \beta < \alpha, then is also true. Then transfinite induction tells us that is true for all ordinals. Usually the proof is broken down into three cases: * Zero case: Prove that is true. * Successor case: Prove that for any , follows from (and, if necessary, for all ). * Limit case: Prove that for any |
Well-founded Relation
In mathematics, a binary relation ''R'' is called well-founded (or wellfounded) on a class ''X'' if every non-empty subset ''S'' ⊆ ''X'' has a minimal element with respect to ''R'', that is, an element ''m'' not related by ''s R m'' (for instance, "''s'' is not smaller than ''m''") for any ''s'' ∈ ''S''. In other words, a relation is well founded if :(\forall S \subseteq X)\; \neq \emptyset \implies (\exists m \in S) (\forall s \in S) \lnot(s \mathrel m) Some authors include an extra condition that ''R'' is set-like, i.e., that the elements less than any given element form a set. Equivalently, assuming the axiom of dependent choice, a relation is well-founded when it contains no infinite descending chains, which can be proved when there is no infinite sequence ''x''0, ''x''1, ''x''2, ... of elements of ''X'' such that ''x''''n''+1 ''R'' ''x''n for every natural number ''n''. In order theory, a partial order is called well-founded ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Well-founded Relation
In mathematics, a binary relation ''R'' is called well-founded (or wellfounded) on a class ''X'' if every non-empty subset ''S'' ⊆ ''X'' has a minimal element with respect to ''R'', that is, an element ''m'' not related by ''s R m'' (for instance, "''s'' is not smaller than ''m''") for any ''s'' ∈ ''S''. In other words, a relation is well founded if :(\forall S \subseteq X)\; \neq \emptyset \implies (\exists m \in S) (\forall s \in S) \lnot(s \mathrel m) Some authors include an extra condition that ''R'' is set-like, i.e., that the elements less than any given element form a set. Equivalently, assuming the axiom of dependent choice, a relation is well-founded when it contains no infinite descending chains, which can be proved when there is no infinite sequence ''x''0, ''x''1, ''x''2, ... of elements of ''X'' such that ''x''''n''+1 ''R'' ''x''n for every natural number ''n''. In order theory, a partial order is called well-founded ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiomatic Set Theory
Set theory is the branch of mathematical logic that studies Set (mathematics), sets, which can be informally described as collections of objects. Although objects of any kind can be collected into a set, set theory, as a branch of mathematics, is mostly concerned with those that are relevant to mathematics as a whole. The modern study of set theory was initiated by the German mathematicians Richard Dedekind and Georg Cantor in the 1870s. In particular, Georg Cantor is commonly considered the founder of set theory. The non-formalized systems investigated during this early stage go under the name of ''naive set theory''. After the discovery of Paradoxes of set theory, paradoxes within naive set theory (such as Russell's paradox, Cantor's paradox and the Burali-Forti paradox) various axiomatic systems were proposed in the early twentieth century, of which Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (with or without the axiom of choice) is still the best-known and most studied. Set theory is co ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Law Of Excluded Middle
In logic, the law of excluded middle (or the principle of excluded middle) states that for every proposition, either this proposition or its negation is true. It is one of the so-called three laws of thought, along with the law of noncontradiction, and the law of identity. However, no system of logic is built on just these laws, and none of these laws provides inference rules, such as modus ponens or De Morgan's laws. The law is also known as the law (or principle) of the excluded third, in Latin ''principium tertii exclusi''. Another Latin designation for this law is ''tertium non datur'': "no third ossibilityis given". It is a tautology. The principle should not be confused with the semantical principle of bivalence, which states that every proposition is either true or false. The principle of bivalence always implies the law of excluded middle, while the converse is not always true. A commonly cited counterexample uses statements unprovable now, but provable in the future ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Dependent Choice
In mathematics, the axiom of dependent choice, denoted by \mathsf , is a weak form of the axiom of choice ( \mathsf ) that is still sufficient to develop most of real analysis. It was introduced by Paul Bernays in a 1942 article that explores which set-theoretic axioms are needed to develop analysis."The foundation of analysis does not require the full generality of set theory but can be accomplished within a more restricted frame." The axiom of dependent choice is stated on p. 86. Formal statement A homogeneous relation R on X is called a total relation if for every a \in X, there exists some b \in X such that a\,R~b is true. The axiom of dependent choice can be stated as follows: For every nonempty set X and every total relation R on X, there exists a sequence (x_n)_ in X such that :x_n\, R~x_ for all n \in \N. ''x''0 may be taken to be any desired element of ''X''. If the set X above is restricted to be the set of all real numbers, then the resulting axiom is deno ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Replacement
In set theory, the axiom schema of replacement is a schema of axioms in Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (ZF) that asserts that the image of any set under any definable mapping is also a set. It is necessary for the construction of certain infinite sets in ZF. The axiom schema is motivated by the idea that whether a class is a set depends only on the cardinality of the class, not on the rank of its elements. Thus, if one class is "small enough" to be a set, and there is a surjection from that class to a second class, the axiom states that the second class is also a set. However, because ZFC only speaks of sets, not proper classes, the schema is stated only for definable surjections, which are identified with their defining formulas. Statement Suppose P is a definable binary relation (which may be a proper class) such that for every set x there is a unique set y such that P(x,y) holds. There is a corresponding definable function F_P, where F_P(x)=y if and only if P(x,y). Consider ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Regularity
In mathematics, the axiom of regularity (also known as the axiom of foundation) is an axiom of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory that states that every non-empty set ''A'' contains an element that is disjoint from ''A''. In first-order logic, the axiom reads: : \forall x\,(x \neq \varnothing \rightarrow \exists y(y \in x\ \land y \cap x = \varnothing)). The axiom of regularity together with the axiom of pairing implies that no set is an element of itself, and that there is no infinite sequence (''an'') such that ''ai+1'' is an element of ''ai'' for all ''i''. With the axiom of dependent choice (which is a weakened form of the axiom of choice), this result can be reversed: if there are no such infinite sequences, then the axiom of regularity is true. Hence, in this context the axiom of regularity is equivalent to the sentence that there are no downward infinite membership chains. The axiom was introduced by ; it was adopted in a formulation closer to the one found in contemporary textb ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Separation
In many popular versions of axiomatic set theory, the axiom schema of specification, also known as the axiom schema of separation, subset axiom scheme or axiom schema of restricted comprehension is an axiom schema. Essentially, it says that any definable subclass of a set is a set. Some mathematicians call it the axiom schema of comprehension, although others use that term for ''unrestricted'' comprehension, discussed below. Because restricting comprehension avoided Russell's paradox, several mathematicians including Zermelo, Fraenkel, and Gödel considered it the most important axiom of set theory. Statement One instance of the schema is included for each formula φ in the language of set theory with free variables among ''x'', ''w''1, ..., ''w''''n'', ''A''. So ''B'' does not occur free in φ. In the formal language of set theory, the axiom schema is: :\forall w_1,\ldots,w_n \, \forall A \, \exists B \, \forall x \, ( x \in B \Leftrightarrow x \in A \land \varphi(x, w_ ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
John Von Neumann
John von Neumann (; hu, Neumann János Lajos, ; December 28, 1903 – February 8, 1957) was a Hungarian-American mathematician, physicist, computer scientist, engineer and polymath. He was regarded as having perhaps the widest coverage of any mathematician of his time and was said to have been "the last representative of the great mathematicians who were equally at home in both pure and applied mathematics". He integrated pure and applied sciences. Von Neumann made major contributions to many fields, including mathematics (foundations of mathematics, measure theory, functional analysis, ergodic theory, group theory, lattice theory, representation theory, operator algebras, matrix theory, geometry, and numerical analysis), physics (quantum mechanics, hydrodynamics, ballistics, nuclear physics and quantum statistical mechanics), economics ( game theory and general equilibrium theory), computing ( Von Neumann architecture, linear programming, numerical meteo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Constructive Set Theory
Constructive set theory is an approach to mathematical constructivism following the program of axiomatic set theory. The same first-order language with "=" and "\in" of classical set theory is usually used, so this is not to be confused with a constructive types approach. On the other hand, some constructive theories are indeed motivated by their interpretability in type theories. In addition to rejecting the principle of excluded middle (), constructive set theories often require some logical quantifiers in their axioms to be bounded, motivated by results tied to impredicativity. Introduction Constructive outlook Use of intuitionistic logic The logic of the set theories discussed here is constructive in that it rejects , i.e. that the disjunction \phi \lor \neg \phi automatically holds for all propositions. As a rule, to prove the excluded middle for a proposition P, i.e. to prove the particular disjunction P \lor \neg P, either P or \neg P needs to be explicitly prov ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
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 such as Russell's paradox. Today, Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, with the historically controversial axiom of choice (AC) included, is the standard form of axiomatic set theory and as such is the most common foundation of mathematics. Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice included is abbreviated ZFC, where C stands for "choice", and ZF refers to the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice excluded. Informally, Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory is intended to formalize a single primitive notion, that of a hereditary well-founded set, so that all entities in the universe of discourse are such sets. Thus the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory refer only to pure sets and prevent its models from containing u ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
