The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

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

Topic: Cardinality: revisited.
Replies: 12   Last Post: Dec 27, 2011 2:26 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 1,368
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Cardinality: revisited.
Posted: Dec 26, 2011 4:00 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article
Zuhair <> wrote:

> I shall re-iterate one of my older definitions of Cardinality:
> The cardinality of any set x is the set of all sets that are
> equinumerous to x and hereditarily subnumerous to x.

Doesn't this run into the "set of all sets" problem? By your definition,
a cardinal is a proper class, which makes using cardinals technical and

That's why the traditional (ZF) approach is to choose a canonical set to
represent each cardinality, rather than using the class of all
bijectively equivalents sets.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.