|
Urelements
In set theory, a branch of mathematics, an urelement or ur-element (from the German prefix ''ur-'', 'primordial') is an object that is not a set, but that may be an element of a set. It is also referred to as an atom or individual. Theory There are several different but essentially equivalent ways to treat urelements in a first-order theory. One way is to work in a first-order theory with two sorts, sets and urelements, with ''a'' ∈ ''b'' only defined when ''b'' is a set. In this case, if ''U'' is an urelement, it makes no sense to say X \in U, although U \in X is perfectly legitimate. Another way is to work in a one-sorted theory with a unary relation used to distinguish sets and urelements. As non-empty sets contain members while urelements do not, the unary relation is only needed to distinguish the empty set from urelements. Note that in this case, the axiom of extensionality must be formulated to apply only to objects that are not urelements. This situation is analogo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Kripke–Platek Set Theory With Urelements
The Kripke–Platek set theory with urelements (KPU) is an axiom system for set theory with urelements, based on the traditional (urelement-free) Kripke–Platek set theory. It is considerably weaker than the (relatively) familiar system ZFU. The purpose of allowing urelements is to allow large or high-complexity objects (such as the set of all reals) to be included in the theory's transitive models without disrupting the usual well-ordering and recursion-theoretic properties of the constructible universe; KP is so weak that this is hard to do by traditional means. Preliminaries The usual way of stating the axioms presumes a two sorted first order language L^* with a single binary relation symbol \in. Letters of the sort p,q,r,... designate urelements, of which there may be none, whereas letters of the sort a,b,c,... designate sets. The letters x,y,z,... may denote both sets and urelements. The letters for sets may appear on both sides of \in, while those for urelements may ... [...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 ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Extensionality
In axiomatic set theory and the branches of logic, mathematics, and computer science that use it, the axiom of extensionality, or axiom of extension, is one of the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. It says that sets having the same elements are the same set. Formal statement In the formal language of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads: :\forall A \, \forall B \, ( \forall X \, (X \in A \iff X \in B) \implies A = B) or in words: :Given any Set (mathematics), set ''A'' and any set ''B'', if for every set ''X'', ''X'' is a member of ''A'' if and only if ''X'' is a member of ''B'', then ''A'' is equal (math), equal to ''B''. :(It is not really essential that ''X'' here be a ''set'' — but in ZF, everything is. See #In set theory with ur-elements, Ur-elements below for when this is violated.) The converse, \forall A \, \forall B \, (A = B \implies \forall X \, (X \in A \iff X \in B) ), of this axiom follows from the substitution property of equality (ma ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
New Foundations
In mathematical logic, New Foundations (NF) is an axiomatic set theory, conceived by Willard Van Orman Quine as a simplification of the theory of types of '' Principia Mathematica''. Quine first proposed NF in a 1937 article titled "New Foundations for Mathematical Logic"; hence the name. Much of this entry discusses NFU, an important variant of NF due to Jensen (1969) and clarified by Holmes (1998). In 1940 and in a revision in 1951, Quine introduced an extension of NF sometimes called "Mathematical Logic" or "ML", that included proper classes as well as sets. New Foundations has a universal set, so it is a non-well-founded set theory. That is to say, it is an axiomatic set theory that allows infinite descending chains of membership, such as … xn ∈ xn-1 ∈ … ∈ x2 ∈ x1. It avoids Russell's paradox by permitting only stratifiable formulas to be defined using the axiom schema of comprehension. For instance, x ∈ y is a stratifiable formula, but x ∈ x is n ... [...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] |
Principle Of Explosion
In classical logic, intuitionistic logic and similar logical systems, the principle of explosion (, 'from falsehood, anything ollows; or ), or the principle of Pseudo-Scotus, is the law according to which any statement can be proven from a contradiction. That is, once a contradiction has been asserted, any proposition (including their negations) can be inferred from it; this is known as deductive explosion. The proof of this principle was first given by 12th-century French philosopher William of Soissons. Priest, Graham. 2011. "What's so bad about contradictions?" In ''The Law of Non-Contradicton'', edited by Priest, Beal, and Armour-Garb. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 25. Due to the principle of explosion, the existence of a contradiction ( inconsistency) in a formal axiomatic system is disastrous; since any statement can be proven, it trivializes the concepts of truth and falsity. Around the turn of the 20th century, the discovery of contradictions such as Russell's par ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Non-well-founded Set Theory
Non-well-founded set theories are variants of axiomatic set theory that allow sets to be elements of themselves and otherwise violate the rule of well-foundedness. In non-well-founded set theories, the foundation axiom of ZFC is replaced by axioms implying its negation. The study of non-well-founded sets was initiated by Dmitry Mirimanoff in a series of papers between 1917 and 1920, in which he formulated the distinction between well-founded and non-well-founded sets; he did not regard well-foundedness as an axiom. Although a number of axiomatic systems of non-well-founded sets were proposed afterwards, they did not find much in the way of applications until Peter Aczel’s hyperset theory in 1988. The theory of non-well-founded sets has been applied in the logical modelling of non-terminating computational processes in computer science (process algebra and final semantics), linguistics and natural language semantics ( situation theory), philosophy (work on the Liar Parado ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Willard Van Orman Quine
Willard Van Orman Quine (; known to his friends as "Van"; June 25, 1908 – December 25, 2000) was an American philosopher and logician in the analytic tradition, recognized as "one of the most influential philosophers of the twentieth century". From 1930 until his death 70 years later, Quine was continually affiliated with Harvard University in one way or another, first as a student, then as a professor. He filled the Edgar Pierce Chair of Philosophy at Harvard from 1956 to 1978. Quine was a teacher of logic and set theory. Quine was famous for his position that first order logic is the only kind worthy of the name, and developed his own system of mathematics and set theory, known as New Foundations. In philosophy of mathematics, he and his Harvard colleague Hilary Putnam developed the Quine–Putnam indispensability argument, an argument for the reality of mathematical entities.Colyvan, Mark"Indispensability Arguments in the Philosophy of Mathematics" The Stanford Encyclo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Finitist Set Theory
Finitist set theory (FST) is a collection theory designed for modeling finite nested structures of individuals and a variety of transitive and antitransitive chains of relations between individuals. Unlike classical set theories such as ZFC and KPU, FST is not intended to function as a foundation for mathematics, but only as a tool in ontological modeling. FST functions as the logical foundation of the classical layer-cake interpretation, and manages to incorporate a large portion of the functionality of discrete mereology. FST models are of type \, which is abbreviated as \mathcal_. U_\alpha is the collection of ur-elements of model \mathcal_. Ur-elements (urs) are indivisible primitives. By assigning a finite integer such as 2 as the value of \alpha, it is determined that U_\alpha contains exactly 2 urs. S_\beta is a collection whose elements will be called sets. \beta\geq0 is a finite integer which denotes the maximum rank (nesting level) of sets in S_\beta. Every set in ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Universe
The universe is all of space and time and their contents, including planets, stars, galaxies, and all other forms of matter and energy. The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of the universe. According to this theory, space and time emerged together ago, and the universe has been expanding ever since the Big Bang. While the spatial size of the entire universe is unknown, it is possible to measure the size of the observable universe, which is approximately 93 billion light-years in diameter at the present day. Some of the earliest cosmological models of the universe were developed by ancient Greek and Indian philosophers and were geocentric, placing Earth at the center. Over the centuries, more precise astronomical observations led Nicolaus Copernicus to develop the heliocentric model with the Sun at the center of the Solar System. In developing the law of universal gravitation, Isaac Newton built upon Copernicus's wor ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Axiom Of Infinity
In axiomatic set theory and the branches of mathematics and philosophy that use it, the axiom of infinity is one of the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. It guarantees the existence of at least one infinite set, namely a set containing the natural numbers. It was first published by Ernst Zermelo as part of his set theory in 1908.Zermelo: ''Untersuchungen über die Grundlagen der Mengenlehre'', 1907, in: Mathematische Annalen 65 (1908), 261-281; Axiom des Unendlichen p. 266f. Formal statement In the formal language of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads: :\exists \mathbf \, ( \empty \in \mathbf \, \land \, \forall x \in \mathbf \, ( \, ( x \cup \ ) \in \mathbf ) ) . In words, there is a set I (the set which is postulated to be infinite), such that the empty set is in I, and such that whenever any ''x'' is a member of I, the set formed by taking the union of ''x'' with its singleton is also a member of I. Such a set is sometimes called an inductive set. I ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Equiconsistency
In mathematical logic, two theories are equiconsistent if the consistency of one theory implies the consistency of the other theory, and vice versa. In this case, they are, roughly speaking, "as consistent as each other". In general, it is not possible to prove the absolute consistency of a theory ''T''. Instead we usually take a theory ''S'', believed to be consistent, and try to prove the weaker statement that if ''S'' is consistent then ''T'' must also be consistent—if we can do this we say that ''T'' is ''consistent relative to S''. If ''S'' is also consistent relative to ''T'' then we say that ''S'' and ''T'' are equiconsistent. Consistency In mathematical logic, formal theories are studied as mathematical objects. Since some theories are powerful enough to model different mathematical objects, it is natural to wonder about their own consistency. Hilbert proposed a program at the beginning of the 20th century whose ultimate goal was to show, using mathematical metho ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
