On 14 Mrz., 22:28, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > On 3/14/2013 2:58 PM, Virgil wrote: > > > In article > > > If that is what Zermelo said then he was wrong to say it because one > > does not ever "union" elements, only sets. > > I want to say that is technically incorrect.
Of course it is not. He defined, the elements of the set T are disjoint sets. > > Surprisingly, the original 1908 paper introduced > a union that simply takes a union across the > elements of the set.
You do not understand. The elements that Zemelo speaks of are sets. I give you an example: For instance all subsets of |N are elements of P(| N).