Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Using classes instead of sets
Replies: 26   Last Post: Apr 1, 2013 8:04 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Frederick Williams Posts: 2,164 Registered: 10/4/10
Re: Using classes instead of sets
Posted: Mar 28, 2013 3:27 PM

pepstein5@gmail.com wrote:
>
> [...] Classes are allowed to contain other classes after all.

If X, Y are proper classes in NBG, one may not have X in Y, but one may
have X subset Y. So it depend on what 'contains' means.

> Of course, we get Russell-type paradoxes if we allow entities to contain themselves, whether the entities be sets or classes.

So by 'contain' you mean $\in$ I suppose. But the language of set
theory allows x \in x as a formula, but it doesn't allow {x | x in x} as
a set. Otoh, {x in y | x in x} is a set if y is.

[I know nothing about set theories that aren't ZF or NBG, and I know

--
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting

Date Subject Author
3/27/13 Stuart M Newberger
3/28/13 Paul
3/28/13 Frederick Williams
3/28/13 Paul
3/28/13 Frederick Williams
3/28/13 Paul
3/28/13 Kaba
3/28/13 David C. Ullrich
3/28/13 Herman Rubin
3/28/13 Frederick Williams
3/28/13 Frederick Williams
3/28/13 Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz
3/28/13 fom
3/28/13 Herman Rubin
3/28/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
3/28/13 fom
3/28/13 Herman Rubin
3/29/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
3/30/13 fom
3/30/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
3/30/13 David C. Ullrich
3/30/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
3/31/13 Frederick Williams
3/30/13 Guest
4/1/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz