COMP 2711H: Lecture 27

Date: 2024-11-04 08:57:34

Reviewed:

Topic / Chapter:

summary

❓Questions

Notes

Sets
  • Sets

    • naive comprehension (possibly leading to paradoxes)
      • writing set with property/formula and element (thing)
      • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« above notation: only works if condition can be written as
    • Russell's paradox
      • let
        • , not
      • then let
        • must be a "set", as it's defined by comprehension
      • paradox: ?
        • if : it means (not in set satisfying )
        • if : it means (in set satisfying )
      • only way out: show that such doesn't exist
  • ZFC

    • i.e. Zermelo-Fraenkel (Axioms) choice
    • creating a new set from an existing set
      • not necessarily all setts hat can be created
    • language must be defined, supporting:
      • arbitrary no. of variables over sets
        • everything: sets
      • logical & boolean operators
        • only is needed
          • others, e.g. , can be derived
      • parenthesis
  • ZFC axioms

    1. extensionality: two sets are equal iff they have the same elements
    2. empty set: there exists a set with no elements
        • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« : a syntactic sugar
    3. unordered pair: if are sets, there is a set
      • w/ elements are exactly
    4. union: if a set, set consisting of all elements of all the elements of
      • e.g. for
      • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« uniqueness of ZF3, ZF4 can be shown
      • notation:
    5. comprehension: from a universal set
      • if a formula in
        • w/ free variables
        • and a set and are sets
        • then following is also a set:
          • subset of satisfies condition
        • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« limited version of original comprehension
      • original problem / paradox doesn't exist as
        • there is no "super set" or set-of-all-sets
        • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« not everything that can be written in is a set
        • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« now, it's Russel's proof instead of paradox
    6. powerset: let be a set. there exists a set whose elements are subsets of
      • denote
  • Supplementary

    • theorem: there is a unique set w/ no elements (w/ ZF1, ZF2)
      • by ZF2, there exists a set w/ no elements
      • let be a set w/ no elements
      • for any , and
        • thus, following holds (no premise holds)
      • by ZF1,
      • empty set: will be notated as
        • e.g.
          • technically not in our language as is included
        • yet, we can use as a variable and write equivalent:
    • ZF3: set creation
      • from , can be obtained
      • from , can be obtained
      • and so on...
    • ordered pairs: w/ : define
    • theorem: let be sets,
      • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« not so trivial proof
    • proof
      • case 1:
        • then (claimed by left side of iff)
          • thus ,
          • thus ,
      • case 2:
        • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« trust me, it's case 1
      • case 3:
        • thus: i.e.
          • i.e.
      • for
        • and for
        • thus: i.e.
          • i.e.
    • extending union
    • class
      • class: collection of form
      • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« needed as all operations are only defined on sets
    • subset
    • Cartesian product
      • let be sets
        • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« paradox-prone comprehension!
      • use
        • RHS: valid formula in now
      • , ,
    • πŸ‘¨β€πŸ« Russel said: accepting one paradox implies all other paradox
      • e.g. 1=2, then I'm the Pope
      • building system without paradox: important
    • relation
      • relation from to : subset
    • function
      • relation : a function
        • if