|
Axiom Of Real Determinacy
In mathematics, the axiom of real determinacy (abbreviated as ADR) is an axiom in set theory. It states the following: The axiom of real determinacy is a stronger version of the axiom of determinacy (AD), which makes the same statement about games where both players choose integers; ADR is inconsistent with the axiom of choice. It also implies the existence of inner models with certain large cardinals. ADR is equivalent to AD plus the axiom of uniformization. See also * AD+ * Axiom of projective determinacy * Topological game In mathematics, a topological game is an infinite game of perfect information played between two players on a topological space. Players choose objects with topological properties such as points, open sets, closed sets and open coverings. Time ... Axioms of set theory Determinacy {{settheory-stub ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Mathematics
Mathematics is an area of knowledge that includes the topics of numbers, formulas and related structures, shapes and the spaces in which they are contained, and quantities and their changes. These topics are represented in modern mathematics with the major subdisciplines of number theory, algebra, geometry, and analysis, respectively. There is no general consensus among mathematicians about a common definition for their academic discipline. Most mathematical activity involves the discovery of properties of abstract objects and the use of pure reason to prove them. These objects consist of either abstractions from nature orin modern mathematicsentities that are stipulated to have certain properties, called axioms. A ''proof'' consists of a succession of applications of deductive rules to already established results. These results include previously proved theorems, axioms, andin case of abstraction from naturesome basic properties that are considered true starting points of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Consistency
In classical deductive logic, a consistent theory is one that does not lead to a logical contradiction. The lack of contradiction can be defined in either semantic or syntactic terms. The semantic definition states that a theory is consistent if it has a model, i.e., there exists an interpretation under which all formulas in the theory are true. This is the sense used in traditional Aristotelian logic, although in contemporary mathematical logic the term ''satisfiable'' is used instead. The syntactic definition states a theory T is consistent if there is no formula \varphi such that both \varphi and its negation \lnot\varphi are elements of the set of consequences of T. Let A be a set of closed sentences (informally "axioms") and \langle A\rangle the set of closed sentences provable from A under some (specified, possibly implicitly) formal deductive system. The set of axioms A is consistent when \varphi, \lnot \varphi \in \langle A \rangle for no formula \varphi. If there e ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Topological Game
In mathematics, a topological game is an infinite game of perfect information played between two players on a topological space. Players choose objects with topological properties such as points, open sets, closed sets and open coverings. Time is generally discrete, but the plays may have transfinite lengths, and extensions to continuum time have been put forth. The conditions for a player to win can involve notions like topological closure and convergence. It turns out that some fundamental topological constructions have a natural counterpart in topological games; examples of these are the Baire property, Baire spaces, completeness and convergence properties, separation properties, covering and base properties, continuous images, Suslin sets, and singular spaces. At the same time, some topological properties that arise naturally in topological games can be generalized beyond a game-theoretic context: by virtue of this duality, topological games have been widely used to describ ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Projective Determinacy
In mathematical logic, projective determinacy is the special case of the axiom of determinacy applying only to projective sets. The axiom of projective determinacy, abbreviated PD, states that for any two-player infinite game of perfect information of length ω in which the players play natural numbers, if the victory set (for either player, since the projective sets are closed under complementation) is projective, then one player or the other has a winning strategy. The axiom is not a theorem of ZFC (assuming ZFC is consistent), but unlike the full axiom of determinacy (AD), which contradicts the axiom of choice, it is not known to be inconsistent with ZFC. PD follows from certain large cardinal axioms, such as the existence of infinitely many Woodin cardinals. PD implies that all projective sets are Lebesgue measurable (in fact, universally measurable) and have the perfect set property and the property of Baire. It also implies that every projective binary relation In mathe ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Uniformization
In set theory, a branch of mathematics, the axiom of uniformization is a weak form of the axiom of choice. It states that if R is a subset of X\times Y, where X and Y are Polish spaces, then there is a subset f of R that is a partial function from X to Y, and whose domain (the set of all x such that f(x) exists) equals : \\, Such a function is called a uniformizing function for R, or a uniformization of R. To see the relationship with the axiom of choice, observe that R can be thought of as associating, to each element of X, a subset of Y. A uniformization of R then picks exactly one element from each such subset, whenever the subset is non-empty. Thus, allowing arbitrary sets ''X'' and ''Y'' (rather than just Polish spaces) would make the axiom of uniformization equivalent to the axiom of choice. A pointclass \boldsymbol is said to have the uniformization property if every relation R in \boldsymbol can be uniformized by a partial function in \boldsymbol. The uniformization pr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Large Cardinal
In the mathematical field of set theory, a large cardinal property is a certain kind of property of transfinite cardinal numbers. Cardinals with such properties are, as the name suggests, generally very "large" (for example, bigger than the least α such that α=ωα). The proposition that such cardinals exist cannot be proved in the most common axiomatization of set theory, namely ZFC, and such propositions can be viewed as ways of measuring how "much", beyond ZFC, one needs to assume to be able to prove certain desired results. In other words, they can be seen, in Dana Scott's phrase, as quantifying the fact "that if you want more you have to assume more". There is a rough convention that results provable from ZFC alone may be stated without hypotheses, but that if the proof requires other assumptions (such as the existence of large cardinals), these should be stated. Whether this is simply a linguistic convention, or something more, is a controversial point among distinct philo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Inner Model
In set theory, a branch of mathematical logic, an inner model for a theory ''T'' is a substructure of a model ''M'' of a set theory that is both a model for ''T'' and contains all the ordinals of ''M''. Definition Let L = \langle \in \rangle be the language of set theory. Let ''S'' be a particular set theory, for example the ZFC axioms and let ''T'' (possibly the same as ''S'') also be a theory in L. If ''M'' is a model for ''S'', and ''N'' is an L-structure such that #''N'' is a substructure of ''M'', i.e. the interpretation \in_N of \in in ''N'' is \cap N^2 #''N'' is a model for ''T'' #the domain of ''N'' is a transitive class of ''M'' #''N'' contains all ordinals of ''M'' then we say that ''N'' is an inner model of ''T'' (in ''M''). Usually ''T'' will equal (or subsume) ''S'', so that ''N'' is a model for ''S'' 'inside' the model ''M'' of ''S''. If only conditions 1 and 2 hold, ''N'' is called a standard model of ''T'' (in ''M''), a standard submodel of ''T'' (if ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Choice
In mathematics, the axiom of choice, or AC, is an axiom of set theory equivalent to the statement that ''a Cartesian product of a collection of non-empty sets is non-empty''. Informally put, the axiom of choice says that given any collection of sets, each containing at least one element, it is possible to construct a new set by arbitrarily choosing one element from each set, even if the collection is infinite. Formally, it states that for every indexed family (S_i)_ of nonempty sets, there exists an indexed set (x_i)_ such that x_i \in S_i for every i \in I. The axiom of choice was formulated in 1904 by Ernst Zermelo in order to formalize his proof of the well-ordering theorem. In many cases, a set arising from choosing elements arbitrarily can be made without invoking the axiom of choice; this is, in particular, the case if the number of sets from which to choose the elements is finite, or if a canonical rule on how to choose the elements is available – some distinguishin ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Integer
An integer is the number zero (), a positive natural number (, , , etc.) or a negative integer with a minus sign (−1, −2, −3, etc.). The negative numbers are the additive inverses of the corresponding positive numbers. In the language of mathematics, the set of integers is often denoted by the boldface or blackboard bold \mathbb. The set of natural numbers \mathbb is a subset of \mathbb, which in turn is a subset of the set of all rational numbers \mathbb, itself a subset of the real numbers \mathbb. Like the natural numbers, \mathbb is countably infinite. An integer may be regarded as a real number that can be written without a fractional component. For example, 21, 4, 0, and −2048 are integers, while 9.75, , and are not. The integers form the smallest group and the smallest ring containing the natural numbers. In algebraic number theory, the integers are sometimes qualified as rational integers to distinguish them from the more general algebraic integers ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom
An axiom, postulate, or assumption is a statement that is taken to be true, to serve as a premise or starting point for further reasoning and arguments. The word comes from the Ancient Greek word (), meaning 'that which is thought worthy or fit' or 'that which commends itself as evident'. The term has subtle differences in definition when used in the context of different fields of study. As defined in classic philosophy, an axiom is a statement that is so evident or well-established, that it is accepted without controversy or question. As used in modern logic, an axiom is a premise or starting point for reasoning. As used in mathematics, the term ''axiom'' is used in two related but distinguishable senses: "logical axioms" and "non-logical axioms". Logical axioms are usually statements that are taken to be true within the system of logic they define and are often shown in symbolic form (e.g., (''A'' and ''B'') implies ''A''), while non-logical axioms (e.g., ) are actually ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Determinacy
In mathematics, the axiom of determinacy (abbreviated as AD) is a possible axiom for set theory introduced by Jan Mycielski and Hugo Steinhaus in 1962. It refers to certain two-person topological games of length ω. AD states that every game of a certain type is determined; that is, one of the two players has a winning strategy. Steinhaus and Mycielski's motivation for AD was its interesting consequences, and suggested that AD could be true in the smallest natural model L(R) of a set theory, which accepts only a weak form of the axiom of choice (AC) but contains all real and all ordinal numbers. Some consequences of AD followed from theorems proved earlier by Stefan Banach and Stanisław Mazur, and Morton Davis. Mycielski and Stanisław Świerczkowski contributed another one: AD implies that all sets of real numbers are Lebesgue measurable. Later Donald A. Martin and others proved more important consequences, especially in descriptive set theory. In 1988, John R. Steel an ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Real Number
In mathematics, a real number is a number that can be used to measure a ''continuous'' one-dimensional quantity such as a distance, duration or temperature. Here, ''continuous'' means that values can have arbitrarily small variations. Every real number can be almost uniquely represented by an infinite decimal expansion. The real numbers are fundamental in calculus (and more generally in all mathematics), in particular by their role in the classical definitions of limits, continuity and derivatives. The set of real numbers is denoted or \mathbb and is sometimes called "the reals". The adjective ''real'' in this context was introduced in the 17th century by René Descartes to distinguish real numbers, associated with physical reality, from imaginary numbers (such as the square roots of ), which seemed like a theoretical contrivance unrelated to physical reality. The real numbers include the rational numbers, such as the integer and the fraction . The rest of the real number ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
