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: Paraphrasing MK
Replies: 0  

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List

Posts: 2,665
Registered: 6/29/07
Paraphrasing MK
Posted: Nov 21, 2012 3:23 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Another way to present MK (which of course prove the consistency of
ZF) is the following:

Language: FOL(=,e)

Define: set(x) <-> Exist y. x e y

Axioms: ID axioms +

(1) Unique Construction: if P is a formula in which y occur free but x
do not, then
all closures of (Exist! x. for all y. y e x <-> set(y) & P) are

(2) Size: Accessible(x) -> set(x)

Where Accessible(x) is defined as:

Accessible(x) <-> (Exist maximally two m. m e x) OR
~ Exist y:
y subset of x &
y is uncountable &
y is a limit cardinal &
y is not reachable by union.

Def.) y is a limit cardinal <-> (for all y. y < x -> Exist z. y < z <
Def.) y is reachable by union <-> (Exist y. y < x & U(y) =< x)

The relation < is "strict subnumerousity" defined in the usual manner.
The relation =< is subnumerousity defined in the usual manner.
"subset of" and "uncountable" also defined in the usual manner.
"Exist maximally two m. phi(m)" is defined as
Exist m,n for all y. phi(y) -> y=m or y=n

So simply MK is about unique construction of accessible sets, and
proper classes of those.


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.