
Re: Using classes instead of sets
Posted:
Mar 30, 2013 10:13 PM


In <o_qdnc1PnJYA9MvMnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@giganews.com>, on 03/29/2013 at 11:26 PM, fom <fomJUNK@nyms.net> said:
>Can you name one?
New foundations has a universal set. However, {xP(x}} only exists in NF if P is stratified. I don't know whether there is a Category Theory equivalent.
>I suppose in that regard, there may be (some standard set theory)+ >(some large cardinal axiom) combination that constitutes a set >theory different from ZFC for which your statement holds.
No; if you start with ZF then you can't have a universal set, even if you have large cardinals.
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk Email subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive Email. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

