Truth, deduction, computation   lecture i (last one)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Truth, deduction, computation lecture i (last one)



My logic lectures at SCU

My logic lectures at SCU
set theory, ZFC



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 1 1


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Truth, deduction, computation lecture i (last one) Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Truth, Deduction, Computation Lecture I Set Theory, ZFC axioms Vlad Patryshev SCU 2013
  • 2. Sets, Formally (ZFC) Abraham Fraenkel Ernst Friedrich Ferdinand Zermelo (pronounced [tsermelo]) Axiom of Choice
  • 3. ZFC Axioms 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Extensionality Axiom Axiom of Empty Set Comprehension Axiom Schema (filter) Axiom of Pair Axiom of Union Replacement Axiom Schema (map) Axiom of Infinity Powerset Axiom Foundation Axiom Axiom of Choice
  • 4. Extensionality A=B ≡ ∀x ((x∈A) ↔ (x∈B)) That’s it. We can prove symmetry, associativity, reflexivity.
  • 5. Axiom of Empty Set ∃A ∀x (¬x∈A) denoted as ∅ Why do we need it? Because all other axioms assume existence of sets; this one states an existence.
  • 6. Comprehension Axiom Schema A is a set ⊢ {x∈A | P(x)} is a set ● Note that we have no rule allowing to build something like {x | x=x} or even {x | x=1} ● Do you see that {x∈A | true} = A? ● It does not give us ∅ ● Also, it does not give us union of two sets
  • 7. Axiom of Pairing ∀x ∀y ∃A (x∈A ∧ y∈A) ● Notation: {a,b} = {x∈?|x=a v x=b} (here we made a choice of an A… not very pure) ● x∈{a,b} ↔ (x=a v x=b) ● Now we can, given an x, build {x} ● We can also build an unlimited number of sets: ∅, {∅}, {{∅}}, {{{∅}}}... ● Introduce ordered pair: {x, {x,y}} (problems?) ● Kuratowski pair: {{x}, {x,y}}
  • 8. Axiom of Union ∀A ∃B ∀y ∀x((x∈y ∧ y∈A) → x∈B) ∪{y∈A} ≡ {x∈? | ∃y (y∈A)} X ∪ Y ≡ ∪{a∈{X,Y}} = {x∈? | x∈X v x∈Y} E.g. ● A={{a,b}, {b,c,d}} ∪A = {a,b,c,d} ● ∪∅ = ∅ ● ∪{x} = x
  • 9. Replacement Axiom Schema ∀A (∀x(x∈A → (∃!y P(x,y))) ⊢ ∃B ∀x(x∈A → (∃y (P(x,y)∧ y∈B)) In other words, if we have a function f defined on A, we can say that its image B is a set.
  • 10. Axiom of Infinity ∃X (∅∈X ∧ ∀y (y∈X → S(y)∈X)) where S(y) ≡ y ∪ {y} Do you recognize Peano Natural Numbers? The axiom says: we have natural numbers.
  • 11. Axiom of Powerset ∀x∃y∀z (z⊂x → z∈y) where A⊂B ≡ ∀x ((x∈A)→(x∈B)) P(X) ≡ {z∈?/*maybe an y from above*/|z⊂X} ● A⊂B here means non-strict subset. E.g. A⊂A ● Now we have ℵ1 ● Can |x| = |P(x)|? No (see Russell paradox)
  • 12. Well-founded Relationship R ⊂ A×A is well-founded iff ∀S⊂A (S=∅ v (∃x∈S ∀y∈S ¬xRy)) ● ● ● ● ● xRy means (x,y) ∈ R E.g. partial order on N, a>b Counterexample: a<b on N Counterexample: aRb, bRc, cRa Can use generalized induction (Noether)
  • 13. Foundation Axiom ∀x (x=∅ v (∃y∈x (¬∃z (z∈y∧z∈x)) ● ● ● ● No set is an element of itself (Quine atoms outlawed) No infinite descending sequence of sets exists No need for Kuratowski pairs For every two sets, only one can be an element of the other
  • 14. Axiom of Choice (AC) ∀x (∅∉x v (∃f:(x→∪x) (∀y∈x f(y) ∈y)) What it means ● every set can be fully ordered ● f:X→Y is surjection ⊢ f has an inverse ● Banach-Tarski paradox Alternatively: Axiom of Determinacy
  • 15. There’s a Java implementation
  • 16. That’s it. Thanks for listening.