|
Extender (set Theory)
In set theory, an extender is a system of ultrafilters which represents an elementary embedding witnessing large cardinal properties. A nonprincipal ultrafilter is the most basic case of an extender. A (κ, λ)-extender can be defined as an elementary embedding of some model M of ZFC− (ZFC minus the power set axiom) having critical point κ ε ''M'', and which maps κ to an ordinal at least equal to λ. It can also be defined as a collection of ultrafilters, one for each n-tuple drawn from λ. Formal definition of an extender Let κ and λ be cardinals with κ≤λ. Then, a set E = \ is called a (κ,λ)-extender if the following properties are satisfied: # each E_a is a κ-complete nonprincipal ultrafilter on kappa;sup><ω and furthermore ## at least one E_a is not κ+-complete, ## for each \alpha \in \kappa, at least one E_a contains the set \. # (Coherence) The E_a are coherent (so that the ultrapowers Ult(''V'',''Ea'') form a directed ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Set Theory
Set theory is the branch of mathematical logic that studies 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 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 commonly employed as a foundational ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ultrafilter (set Theory)
In the mathematical field of set theory, an ultrafilter is a ''maximal proper filter'': it is a filter U on a given non-empty set X which is a certain type of non-empty family of subsets of X, that is not equal to the power set \wp(X) of X (such filters are called ) and that is also "maximal" in that there does not exist any other proper filter on X that contains it as a proper subset. Said differently, a proper filter U is called an ultrafilter if there exists proper filter that contains it as a subset, that proper filter (necessarily) being U itself. More formally, an ultrafilter U on X is a proper filter that is also a maximal filter on X with respect to set inclusion, meaning that there does not exist any proper filter on X that contains U as a proper subset. Ultrafilters on sets are an important special instance of ultrafilters on partially ordered sets, where the partially ordered set consists of the power set \wp(X) and the partial order is subset inclusion \,\subsete ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Elementary Embedding
In model theory, a branch of mathematical logic, two structures ''M'' and ''N'' of the same signature ''σ'' are called elementarily equivalent if they satisfy the same first-order ''σ''-sentences. If ''N'' is a substructure of ''M'', one often needs a stronger condition. In this case ''N'' is called an elementary substructure of ''M'' if every first-order ''σ''-formula ''φ''(''a''1, …, ''a''''n'') with parameters ''a''1, …, ''a''''n'' from ''N'' is true in ''N'' if and only if it is true in ''M''. If ''N'' is an elementary substructure of ''M'', then ''M'' is called an elementary extension of ''N''. An embedding ''h'': ''N'' → ''M'' is called an elementary embedding of ''N'' into ''M'' if ''h''(''N'') is an elementary substructure of ''M''. A substructure ''N'' of ''M'' is elementary if and only if it passes the Tarski–Vaught test: every first-order formula ''φ''(''x'', ''b''1, …, ''b''''n'') with para ... [...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] |
Power Set Axiom
In mathematics, the axiom of power set is one of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms of axiomatic set theory. In the formal language of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads: :\forall x \, \exists y \, \forall z \, \in y \iff \forall w \, (w \in z \Rightarrow w \in x)/math> where ''y'' is the Power set of ''x'', \mathcal(x). In English, this says: :Given any set ''x'', there is a set \mathcal(x) such that, given any set ''z'', this set ''z'' is a member of \mathcal(x) if and only if every element of ''z'' is also an element of ''x''. More succinctly: ''for every set x, there is a set \mathcal(x) consisting precisely of the subsets of x.'' Note the subset relation \subseteq is not used in the formal definition as subset is not a primitive relation in formal set theory; rather, subset is defined in terms of set membership, \in. By the axiom of extensionality, the set \mathcal(x) is unique. The axiom of power set appears in most axiomatizations of set theory. It is ge ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Tuple
In mathematics, a tuple is a finite ordered list (sequence) of elements. An -tuple is a sequence (or ordered list) of elements, where is a non-negative integer. There is only one 0-tuple, referred to as ''the empty tuple''. An -tuple is defined inductively using the construction of an ordered pair. Mathematicians usually write tuples by listing the elements within parentheses "" and separated by a comma and a space; for example, denotes a 5-tuple. Sometimes other symbols are used to surround the elements, such as square brackets "nbsp; or angle brackets "⟨ ⟩". Braces "" are used to specify arrays in some programming languages but not in mathematical expressions, as they are the standard notation for sets. The term ''tuple'' can often occur when discussing other mathematical objects, such as vectors. In computer science, tuples come in many forms. Most typed functional programming languages implement tuples directly as product types, tightly associated with algebr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ultraproduct
The ultraproduct is a mathematical construction that appears mainly in abstract algebra and mathematical logic, in particular in model theory and set theory. An ultraproduct is a quotient of the direct product of a family of structures. All factors need to have the same signature. The ultrapower is the special case of this construction in which all factors are equal. For example, ultrapowers can be used to construct new fields from given ones. The hyperreal numbers, an ultrapower of the real numbers, are a special case of this. Some striking applications of ultraproducts include very elegant proofs of the compactness theorem and the completeness theorem, Keisler's ultrapower theorem, which gives an algebraic characterization of the semantic notion of elementary equivalence, and the Robinson–Zakon presentation of the use of superstructures and their monomorphisms to construct nonstandard models of analysis, leading to the growth of the area of nonstandard analysis, which was pion ... [...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] |
Direct Limit
In mathematics, a direct limit is a way to construct a (typically large) object from many (typically smaller) objects that are put together in a specific way. These objects may be groups, rings, vector spaces or in general objects from any category. The way they are put together is specified by a system of homomorphisms (group homomorphism, ring homomorphism, or in general morphisms in the category) between those smaller objects. The direct limit of the objects A_i, where i ranges over some directed set I, is denoted by \varinjlim A_i . (This is a slight abuse of notation as it suppresses the system of homomorphisms that is crucial for the structure of the limit.) Direct limits are a special case of the concept of colimit in category theory. Direct limits are dual to inverse limits, which are also a special case of limits in category theory. Formal definition We will first give the definition for algebraic structures like groups and modules, and then the general definition ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Transitive Set
In set theory, a branch of mathematics, a set A is called transitive if either of the following equivalent conditions hold: * whenever x \in A, and y \in x, then y \in A. * whenever x \in A, and x is not an urelement, then x is a subset of A. Similarly, a class M is transitive if every element of M is a subset of M. Examples Using the definition of ordinal numbers suggested by John von Neumann, ordinal numbers are defined as hereditarily transitive sets: an ordinal number is a transitive set whose members are also transitive (and thus ordinals). The class of all ordinals is a transitive class. Any of the stages V_\alpha and L_\alpha leading to the construction of the von Neumann universe V and Gödel's constructible universe L are transitive sets. The universes V and L themselves are transitive classes. This is a complete list of all finite transitive sets with up to 20 brackets: * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, * \, ... [...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] |
Critical Point (set Theory)
In set theory, the critical point of an elementary embedding of a transitive class into another transitive class is the smallest ordinal which is not mapped to itself. p. 323 Suppose that j: N \to M is an elementary embedding where N and M are transitive classes and j is definable in N by a formula of set theory with parameters from N. Then j must take ordinals to ordinals and j must be strictly increasing. Also j(\omega) = \omega. If j(\alpha) = \alpha for all \alpha \kappa, then \kappa is said to be the critical point of j. If N is '' V'', then \kappa (the critical point of j) is always a measurable cardinal, i.e. an uncountable cardinal number ''κ'' such that there exists a \kappa-complete, non-principal ultrafilter over \kappa. Specifically, one may take the filter to be \. Generally, there will be many other <''κ''-complete, non-principal ultrafilters over . However, might be different from the |
