Aggregative consequentialism and several other popular moral theories are threatened with paralysis: when coupled with some plausible assumptions, they seem to imply that it is always ethically indifferent what you do. Modern cosmology teaches that the world might well contain an infinite number of happy and sad people and other candidate value-bearing locations. Aggregative ethics implies that such a world contains an infinite amount of positive value and an infinite amount of negative value. You can affect only (...) a finite amount of good or bad. In standard cardinal arithmetic, an infinite quantity is unchanged by the addition or subtraction of any finite quantity. So it appears you cannot change the value of the world. Modifications of aggregationism aimed at resolving the paralysis are only partially effective and cause severe side effects, including problems of “fanaticism”, “distortion”, and erosion of the intuitions that originally motivated the theory. Is the infinitarian challenge fatal? (shrink)

This paper deals with two different problems in which infinity plays a central role. I first respond to a claim that infinity renders counting knowledge-level beliefs an infeasible approach to measuring and comparing how much we know. There are two methods of comparing sizes of infinite sets, using the one-to-one correspondence principle or the subset principle, and I argue that we should use the subset principle for measuring knowledge. I then turn to the normalizability and coarse tuning objections to (...) fine-tuning arguments for the existence of God or a multiverse. These objections center on the difficulty of talking about the epistemic probability of a physical constant falling within a finite life-permitting range when the possible range of that constant is infinite. Applying the lessons learned regarding infinity and the measurement of knowledge, I hope to blunt much of the force of these objections to fine-tuning arguments. (shrink)

For a set x, let ${\cal S}\left$ be the set of all permutations of x. We prove in ZF several results concerning this notion, among which are the following: For all sets x such that ${\cal S}\left$ is Dedekind infinite, $\left| {{{\cal S}_{{\rm{fin}}}}\left} \right| < \left| {{\cal S}\left} \right|$ and there are no finite-to-one functions from ${\cal S}\left$ into ${{\cal S}_{{\rm{fin}}}}\left$, where ${{\cal S}_{{\rm{fin}}}}\left$ denotes the set of all permutations of x which move only finitely many elements. For all (...) sets x such that ${\cal S}\left$ is Dedekind infinite, $\left| {{\rm{seq}}\left} \right| < \left| {{\cal S}\left} \right|$ and there are no finite-to-one functions from ${\cal S}\left$ into seq, where seq denotes the set of all finite sequences of elements of x. For all infinite sets x such that there exists a permutation of x without fixed points, there are no finite-to-one functions from ${\cal S}\left$ into x. For all sets x, $|{[x]^2}| < \left| {{\cal S}\left} \right|$. (shrink)

For a set x, let S(x) be the set of all permutations of x. We prove by the method of permutation models that the following statements are consistent with ZF: (1) There is an infinite set x such that |p(x)|<|S(x)|<|seq^1-1(x)|<|seq(x)|, where p(x) is the powerset of x, seq(x) is the set of all finite sequences of elements of x, and seq^1-1(x) is the set of all finite sequences of elements of x without repetition. (2) There is a Dedekind (...) class='Hi'>infinite set x such that |S(x)|<|[x]^3| and such that there exists a surjection from x onto S(x). (3) There is an infinite set x such that there is a finite-to-one function from S(x) into x. (shrink)

Fix a cardinal κ. We can ask the question: what kind of a logic L is needed to characterize all models of cardinality κ up to isomorphism by their L-theories? In other words: for which logics L it is true that if any models A and B of cardinality κ satisfy the same L-theory then they are isomorphic?It is always possible to characterize models of cardinality κ by their Lκ+,κ+-theories, but we are interested in finding a “small” logic L, i.e., (...) the sentences of L are hereditarily of smaller cardinality than κ. For any cardinal κ it is independent of ZFC whether any such small definable logic L exists. If it exists it can be second order logic for κ=ω and fourth order logic or certain infinitary second order logic Lκ,ω source for uncountable κ. All models of cardinality κ can always be characterized by their theories in a small logic with generalized quantifiers, but the logic may be not definable in the language of set theory. Our work continues and extends the work of Ajtai [Miklos Ajtai, Isomorphism and higher order equivalence, Ann. Math. Logic 16 181–203]. (shrink)

Although Peano’s negative attitude toward infinitesimals—particularly, geometric infinitesimals—is widely documented, his conception of a single infinite cardinality and, more generally, his views on the infinite are less known. In this article, we reconstruct the evolution of Peano’s ideas on these questions and formulate several hypotheses about their underlying motivations.

LetG be a group. CallG akC-group if every element ofG has less thank conjugates. Denote byP(G) the least cardinalk such that any subset ofG of sizek contains two elements which commute.It is shown that the existence of groupsG such thatP(G) is a singular cardinal is consistent withZFC. So is the existence of groupsG which are notkC but haveP(G) (...) questions, and improves results, of Faber, Laver and McKenzie. (shrink)

The Axiom of Choice implies the Partition Principle and the existence, uniqueness, and monotonicity of (possibly infinite) sums of cardinal numbers. We establish several deductive relations among those principles and their variants: the monotonicity follows from the existence plus uniqueness; the uniqueness implies the Partition Principle; the Weak Partition Principle is strictly stronger than the Well-Ordered Choice.

The factorial of a cardinal, denoted by, is the cardinality of the set of all permutations of a set which is of cardinality. We give a condition that makes the cardinal equality provable without the axiom of choice. In fact, we prove in that, for all cardinals, if and there is a permutation without fixed points on a set which is of cardinality, then.

The factorial of a cardinal, denoted by, is the cardinality of the set of all permutations of a set which is of cardinality. We give a condition that makes the cardinal equality provable without the axiom of choice. In fact, we prove in that, for all cardinals, if and there is a permutation without fixed points on a set which is of cardinality, then.

This article enlarges classical syllogistic logic with assertions having to do with comparisons between the sizes of sets. So it concerns a logical system whose sentences are of the following forms: Allxareyand Somexarey, There are at least as manyxasy, and There are morexthany. Herexandyrange over subsets (not elements) of a giveninfiniteset. Moreover,xandymay appear complemented (i.e., as$\bar{x}$and$\bar{y}$), with the natural meaning. We formulate a logic for our language that is based on the classical syllogistic. The main result is a soundness/completeness theorem. (...) There are efficient algorithms for proof search and model construction. (shrink)

Cantor’s theory of cardinal numbers offers a way to generalize arithmetic from finite sets to infinite sets using the notion of one-to-one association between two sets. As is well known, all countable infinite sets have the same ‘size’ in this account, namely that of the cardinality of the natural numbers. However, throughout the history of reflections on infinity another powerful intuition has played a major role: if a collectionAis properly included in a collectionBthen the ‘size’ ofAshould be less (...) than the ‘size’ ofB(part–whole principle). This second intuition was not developed mathematically in a satisfactory way until quite recently. In this article I begin by reviewing the contributions of some thinkers who argued in favor of the assignment of different sizes to infinite collections of natural numbers (Thabit ibn Qurra, Grosseteste, Maignan, Bolzano). Then, I review some recent mathematical developments that generalize the part–whole principle to infinite sets in a coherent fashion (Katz, Benci, Di Nasso, Forti). Finally, I show how these new developments are important for a proper evaluation of a number of positions in philosophy of mathematics which argue either for the inevitability of the Cantorian notion of infinite number (Gödel) or for the rational nature of the Cantorian generalization as opposed to that, based on the part–whole principle, envisaged by Bolzano (Kitcher). (shrink)

Let κ be an infinite cardinal. A κ-complete nonprincipal ultrafilter, or, for short, a κ- ultrafilter on a set A is a (nonempty) family U of subsets of A satisfying (i) S ⊆ U & |S|1 < κ ⇒ ∩S ∈ U (κ-completeness) (ii) X ∈ U & X ⊆ Y ⊆ A ⇒ Y ∈ U, (iii) ∀X ⊆ A [X ∈ U or A – X ∈ U] (iv) {a} ∉ U for any a..

Our main results are: (A) It is consistent relative to a large cardinal that holds but fails. (B) If holds and are two infinite cardinals such that and λ carries a good scale, then holds. (C) If are two cardinals such that κ is λ‐Shelah and, then there is no good scale for λ.

We write and for the cardinalities of the set of finite sequences and the set of finite subsets, respectively, of a set which is of cardinality. With the axiom of choice (), for every infinite cardinal but, without, any relationship between and for an arbitrary infinite cardinal cannot be proved. In this paper, we give conditions that make and comparable for an infinite cardinal. Among our results, we show that, if we assume the axiom of choice for (...) sets of finite sets, then for every Dedekind‐infinite cardinal and the condition that is Dedekind‐infinite cannot be weakened to weakly Dedekind‐infinite. (shrink)

This chapter challenges Cantor’s notion of the ‘power’, or ‘cardinality’, of an infinite set. According to Cantor, two infinite sets have the same cardinality if and only if there is a one-to-one correspondence between them. Cantor showed that there are infinite sets that do not have the same cardinality in this sense. Further, he took this result to show that there are infinite sets of different sizes. This has become the standard understanding of the result. The (...) chapter challenges this, arguing that we have no reason to think there are infinite sets of different sizes. It begins with an initial argument against Cantor’s claim that there are infinite sets of different sizes and then proceeds, by way of an analogy between Cantor’s mathematical result and Russell’s paradox, to a more direct argument. (shrink)

§1. Introduction. Among the most remarkable discoveries in set theory in the last quarter century is the rich structure of the arithmetic of singular cardinals, and its deep relationship to large cardinals. The problem of finding a complete set of rules describing the behavior of the continuum function 2ℵα for singular ℵα's, known as the Singular Cardinals Problem, has been attacked by many different techniques, involving forcing, large cardinals, inner models, and various combinatorial methods. The work (...) on the singular cardinals problem has led to many often surprising results, culminating in a beautiful theory of Saharon Shelah called the pcf theory. The most striking result to date states that if 2ℵn < ℵω for every n = 0, 1, 2, …, then 2ℵω < ℵω4.In this paper we present a brief history of the singular cardinals problem, the present knowledge, and an introduction into Shelah's pcf theory. In Sections 2, 3 and 4 we introduce the reader to cardinal arithmetic and to the singular cardinals problems. Sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 describe the main results and methods of the last 25 years and explain the role of large cardinals in the singular cardinals problem. In Section 9 we present an outline of the pcf theory.§2. The arithmetic of cardinal numbers. Cardinal numbers were introduced by Cantor in the late 19th century and problems arising from investigations of rules of arithmetic of cardinal numbers led to the birth of set theory. The operations of addition, multiplication and exponentiation of infinite cardinal numbers are a natural generalization of such operations on integers. Addition and multiplication of infinite cardinals turns out to be simple: when at least one of the numbers κ, λ is infinite then both κ + λ and κ·λ are equal to max {κ, λ}. In contrast with + and ·, exponentiation presents fundamental problems. In the simplest nontrivial case, 2κ represents the cardinal number of the power set P, the set of all subsets of κ. (Here we adopt the usual convention of set theory that the number κ is identified with a set of cardinality κ, namely the set of all ordinal numbers smaller than κ. (shrink)

For aggregative theories of moral value, it is a challenge to rank worlds that each contain infinitely many valuable events. And, although there are several existing proposals for doing so, few provide a cardinal measure of each world's value. This raises the even greater challenge of ranking lotteries over such worlds—without a cardinal value for each world, we cannot apply expected value theory. How then can we compare such lotteries? To date, we have just one method for doing so (proposed (...) separately by Arntzenius, Bostrom, and Meacham), which is to compare the prospects for value at each individual location, and to then represent and compare lotteries by their expected values at each of those locations. But, as I show here, this approach violates several key principles of decision theory and generates some implausible verdicts. I propose an alternative—one which delivers plausible rankings of lotteries, which is implied by a plausible collection of axioms, and which can be applied alongside almost any ranking of infinite worlds. (shrink)

We study the influence of the existence of large cardinals on the existence of wellorderings of power sets of infinite cardinals κ with the property that the collection of all initial segments of the wellordering is definable by a Σ1‐formula with parameter κ. A short argument shows that the existence of a measurable cardinal δ implies that such wellorderings do not exist at δ‐inaccessible cardinals of cofinality not equal to δ and their successors. In contrast, our (...) main result shows that these wellorderings exist at all other uncountable cardinals in the minimal model containing a measurable cardinal. In addition, we show that measurability is the smallest large cardinal property that imposes restrictions on the existence of such wellorderings at uncountable cardinals. Finally, we generalise the above result to the minimal model containing two measurable cardinals. (shrink)

Let k be an infinite cardinal. A subset of $(^k k)^n $ is a $\Sigma _1^1 $ -subset if it is the projection p[T] of all cofinal branches through a subtree T of $(lt;kk)^{n + 1} $ of height k. We define $\Sigma _k^1 - ,\Pi _k^1 $ - and $\Delta _k^1$ subsets of $(^k k)^n $ as usual. Given an uncountable regular cardinal k with k = k (...) that there is a shrink)

An infinite cardinal λ is Magidor if and only if. It is known that if λ is Magidor then for some, and the first such α is denoted by. In this paper we try to understand some of the properties of. We prove that can be the successor of a supercompact cardinal, when λ is a Magidor cardinal. From this result we obtain the consistency of being a successor of a singular cardinal with uncountable cofinality.

We show that the predicate “x is the power set of y” is ‐definable, if V = L[E] is an extender model constructed from a coherent sequences of extenders, provided that there is no inner model with a Woodin cardinal. Here is a predicate true of just the infinite cardinals. From this we conclude: the validities of second order logic are reducible to, the set of validities of the Härtig quantifier logic. Further we show that if no L[E] (...) model has a cardinal strong up to one of its ℵ‐fixed points, and, the Löwenheim number of this logic, is less than the least weakly inaccessible δ, then (i) is a limit of measurable cardinals of K, and (ii) the Weak Covering Lemma holds at δ. (shrink)

In this paper, we rigorously prove the existence of type-level ordered pairs in Quine’s New Foundations with atoms, augmented by the axiom of infinity and the axiom of choice (NFU + Inf + AC). The proof uses the cardinal squaring principle; more precisely, its instance for the (infinite) universe (VCSP), which is a theorem of NFU + Inf + AC. Therefore, we have a justification for proposing a new axiomatic extension of NFU, in order to obtain type-level ordered pairs (...) almost from the beginning. This axiomatic extension is NFU + Inf + AC + VCSP, which is equivalent to NFU + Inf + AC, but easier to reason about. (shrink)

In this paper, we sketch the development of two important themes of modern set theory, both of which can be regarded as growing out of work of Kurt Gödel. We begin with a review of some basic concepts and conventions of set theory.§0. The ordinal numbers were Georg Cantor's deepest contribution to mathematics. After the natural numbers 0, 1, …, n, … comes the first infinite ordinal number ω, followed by ω + 1, ω + 2, …, ω + (...) ω, … and so forth. ω is the first limit ordinal as it is neither 0 nor a successor ordinal. We follow the von Neumann convention, according to which each ordinal number α is identified with the set {ν ∣ ν α} of its predecessors. The ∈ relation on ordinals thus coincides with <. We have 0 = ∅ and α + 1 = α ∪ {α}. According to the usual set-theoretic conventions, ω is identified with the first infinite cardinal ℵ0, similarly for the first uncountable ordinal number ω1 and the first uncountable cardinal number ℵ1, etc. We thus arrive at the following picture:The von Neumann hierarchy divides the class V of all sets into a hierarchy of sets Vα indexed by the ordinal numbers. The recursive definition reads: ;Vλ = ∪v<λVv for limit ordinals λ. We can represent this hierarchy by the following picture. (shrink)

With the Axiom of Choice, for any infinite cardinal but, without, we cannot conclude any relationship between and for an arbitrary infinite cardinal. In this paper, we give some properties of in the absence of and compare them to those of for an infinite cardinal. Among our results, we show that “ for any infinite cardinal and any natural number n” is provable in although “ for any infinite cardinal ” is not.

We prove that if image is a Jensen extender model, then image satisfies the Gap-1 morass principle. As a corollary to this and a theorem of Jensen, the model image satisfies the Gap-2 Cardinal Transfer Property → for all infinite cardinals κ and λ.

We examine combinatorial aspects and consistency strength properties of almost Ramsey cardinals. Without the Axiom of Choice, successor cardinals may be almost Ramsey. From fairly mild supercompactness assumptions, we construct a model of ZF + ${\neg {\rm AC}_\omega}$ in which every infinite cardinal is almost Ramsey. Core model arguments show that strong assumptions are necessary. Without successors of singular cardinals, we can weaken this to an equiconsistency of the following theories: “ZFC + There is a proper (...) class of regular almost Ramsey cardinals”, and “ZF + DC + All infinite cardinals except possibly successors of singular cardinals are almost Ramsey”. (shrink)

Assume that all algebras are atomless. (1) $Spind(A x B) = Spind(A) \cup Spind(B)$ . (2) $(\prod_{i\inI}^{w} = {\omega} \cup \bigcup_{i\inI}$ $Spind(A_{i})$ . Now suppose that $\kappa$ and $\lambda$ are infinite cardinals, with $kappa$ uncountable and regular and with $\kappa \textless \lambda$ . (3) There is an atomless Boolean algebra A such that $\mathfrak{u}(A) = \kappa$ and $i(A) = \lambda$ . (4) If $\lambda$ is also regular, then there is an atomless Boolean algebra A such that $t(A) = (...) \mathfrak{s}(A) = \kappa$ and $\mathfrak{a}(A) = \lambda$ . All results are in ZFC, and answer some problems posed in Monk [01] and Monk [ $\infty$ ]. (shrink)

In the Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (ZF), |$|\textrm {fin}(A)|<2^{|A|}\leq |\textrm {Part}(A)|$| for any infinite set |$A$|⁠, where |$\textrm {fin}(A)$| is the set of finite subsets of |$A$|⁠, |$2^{|A|}$| is the cardinality of the power set of |$A$| and |$\textrm {Part}(A)$| is the set of partitions of |$A$|⁠. In this paper, we show in ZF that |$|\textrm {fin}(A)|<|\textrm {Part}_{\textrm {fin}}(A)|$| for any set |$A$| with |$|A|\geq 5$|⁠, where |$\textrm {Part}_{\textrm {fin}}(A)$| is the set of partitions of |$A$| whose members are finite. (...) We also show that, without the Axiom of Choice, any relationship between |$|\textrm {Part}_{\textrm {fin}}(A)|$| and |$2^{|A|}$| for an arbitrary infinite set |$A$| cannot be concluded. (shrink)

Assuming that GCH holds and [Formula: see text] is [Formula: see text]-supercompact, we construct a generic extension [Formula: see text] of [Formula: see text] in which [Formula: see text] remains strongly inaccessible and [Formula: see text] for every infinite cardinal [Formula: see text]. In particular the rank-initial segment [Formula: see text] is a model of ZFC in which [Formula: see text] for every infinite cardinal [Formula: see text].

For an infinite cardinal K a stronger version of K-distributivity for Boolean algebras, called k-partition completeness, is defined and investigated . It is shown that every k-partition complete Boolean algebra is K-weakly representable, and for strongly inaccessible K these concepts coincide. For regular K ≥ u, it is proved that an atomless K-partition complete Boolean algebra is an updirected union of basic K-tree algebras. Using K-partition completeness, the concept of γ-almost compactness is introduced for γ ≥ K. For strongly (...) inaccessible K we show that K is K-almost compact iff K is weakly compact, and if K is 2K-almost compact, then K is measurable. Further K is strongly compact iff it is γ-almost compact for all γ ≥ K. (shrink)

The countable sequences of cardinals which arise as cardinal sequences of superatomic Boolean algebras were characterized by La Grange on the basis of ZFC set theory. However, no similar characterization is available for uncountable cardinal sequences. In this paper we prove the following two consistency results:Ifθ = 〈κ α :α <ω 1〉 is a sequence of infinite cardinals, then there is a cardinal-preserving notion of forcing that changes cardinal exponentiation and forces the existence of a superatomic Boolean (...) algebraB such that θ is the cardinal sequence ofB.Ifκ is an uncountable cardinal such thatκ <κ =κ andθ = 〈κ α :α <κ +〉 is a cardinal sequence such thatκ α ≥κ for everyα <κ + andκ α =κ for everyα <κ + such that cf(α)<κ, then there is a cardinal-preserving notion of forcing that changes cardinal exponentiation and forces the existence of a superatomic Boolean algebraB such that θ is the cardinal sequence ofB. (shrink)

In set theory without the Axiom of Choice, we investigate the set-theoretic strength of the principle NDS which states that there is no function f on the set ω of natural numbers such that for everyn ∈ ω, f ≺ f, where for sets x and y, x ≺ y means that there is a one-to-one map g : x → y, but no one-to-one map h : y → x. It is a long standing open problem whether NDS implies (...) AC. In this paper, among other results, we show that NDS is a strong axiom by establishing that ACLO ↛ NDS in ZFA set theory. The latter result provides a strongly negative answer to the question of whether “every Dedekind-finite set is finite” implies NDS addressed in G. H. Moore “Zermelo’s Axiom of Choice. Its Origins, Development, and Influence” and in P. Howard–J. E. Rubin “Consequences of the Axiom of Choice”. We also prove that ACWO ↛ NDS in ZF and that “for all infinite cardinals m, m + m = m” ↛ NDS in ZFA. (shrink)

The thesis of Weak Unrestricted Composition says that every pair of objects has a fusion. This thesis has been argued by Contessa and Smith to be compatible with the world being junky and hence to evade an argument against the necessity of Strong Unrestricted Composition proposed by Bohn. However, neither Weak Unrestricted Composition alone nor the different variants of it that have been proposed in the literature can provide us with a satisfying answer to the special composition question, or so (...) we will argue. We will then go on to explore an alternative family of purely mereological rules in the vicinity of Weak Unrestricted Composition, Cardinal Composition: A plurality of pairwise non-overlapping objects composes an object iff the objects in the plurality are of cardinality smaller than $$\kappa $$ κ. As we will show, all the instances for infinite $$\kappa $$ κ s determine fusion and are compatible with junk, and every instance for a $$\kappa > \aleph _0$$ κ > ℵ 0 is furthermore compatible with gunk and dense chains of parthood. (shrink)

It is proved in (without the axiom of choice) that for all infinite cardinals and all natural numbers, where is the cardinality of the set of permutations with exactly non‐fixed points of a set which is of cardinality.

We prove two theorems which in a certain sense show that the number of normal measures a measurable cardinal κ can carry is independent of a given fixed behavior of the continuum function on any set having measure 1 with respect to every normal measure over κ . First, starting with a model V ⊨ “ZFC + GCH + o = δ*” for δ* ≤ κ+ any finite or infinite cardinal, we force and construct an inner model N ⊆ (...) V [G] so thatN ⊨ “ZF + [DCδ] + ¬ACκ + κ carries exactly δ* normal measures + 2δ = δ++ on a set having measure 1 with respect to every normal measure over κ”.There is nothing special about 2δ = δ here, and other stated values for the continuum function will be possible as well. Then, starting with a modelV ⊨ “ZFC + GCH + κis supercompact”,we force and construct models of AC in which, roughly speaking, regardless of the specified behavior of the continuum function below κ on any set having measure 1 with respect to every normal measure over κ, κ can in essence carry any number of normal measures δ* ≥ κ++. (shrink)

A cardinal characteristic can often be described as the smallest size of a family of sequences which has a given property. Instead of this traditional concern for a smallest realization of the given property, a basically new approach, taken in [4] and [5], asks for a realization whose members are sequences of labels that correspond to 1-way infinite paths in a labelled graph. We study this approach as such, establishing tools that are applicable to all these cardinal characteristics. As (...) an application, we demonstrate the power of the tools developed by presenting a short proof of the bounded graph conjecture [4]. (shrink)

In [1] it was shown that if κ is a strong partition cardinal, then every function from [κ ]κ to [κ ]κ is continuous almost everywhere. In this investigation, we explore whether such functions are differentiable or integrable in any sense. Some of them are.

This paper considers a range of infinite exchange problems, including one recent example discussed by Barrett and Arntzenius, and propose a general taxonomy based on cardinality considerations and the possibility of identifying and tracking the units of exchange.

We show that g ≤ c(Sym(ω)) where g is the groupwise density number and c(Sym(ω)) is the cofinality of the infinite symmetric group. This solves (the second half of) a problem addressed by Thomas.