This paper seeks to question the position of ZF as the dominant system of set theory, and in particular to examine whether there is any philosophical justification for the axiom of foundation. After some historical observations regarding Poincare and Russell, and the notions of circularity and hierarchy, the iterative conception of set is argued to be a semi-constructvist hybrid without philosophical coherence. ZF cannot be justified as necessary to avoid paradoxes, as axiomatizing a coherent notion of set, nor on pragmatic (...) grounds, and should be replaced by a system allowing non-well-founded sets. (shrink)

In this paper, we present set theories based upon the paraconsistent logic Pac. We describe two different techniques to construct models of such set theories. The first of these is an adaptation of one used to construct classical models of positive comprehension. The properties of the models obtained in that way give rise to a natural paraconsistent set theory which is presented here. The status of the axiom of choice in that theory is also discussed. The second leads to show (...) that any classical universe of set theory (e.g. a model of ZF) can be extended to a paraconsistent one, via a term model construction using an adapted bisimulation technique. (shrink)

A theory of two-sided containers, denoted ZF2, is introduced. This theory is then shown to be synonymous to ZF in the sense of Visser (2006), via an interpretation involving Quine pairs. Several subtheories of ZF2, and their relationships with ZF, are also examined. We include a short discussion of permutation models (in the sense of Rieger–Bernays) over ZF2. We close with highlighting some areas for future research, mostly motivated by the need to understand non-wellfounded games.

We present a generalization of the algebra-valued models of \ where the axioms of set theory are not necessarily mapped to the top element of an algebra, but may get intermediate values, in a set of designated values. Under this generalization there are many algebras which are neither Boolean, nor Heyting, but that still validate \.

Let ZFB be ZF + "every set is the same size as a wellfounded set". Then the following are true. Every sentence true in every (Rieger-Bernays) permutation model of a model of ZF is a theorem of ZFB. (i.e.. ZFB is the theory of Rieger-Bernays permutation models of models of ZF) ZF and ZFAFA are both extensions of ZFB conservative for stratified formulæ. The class of models of ZFB is closed under creation of Rieger-Bernays permutation models.

We consider mainly the following version of set theory: “ZF+DC and for every λ,λℵ0\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\lambda, \lambda^{\aleph_0}}$$\end{document} is well ordered”, our thesis is that this is a reasonable set theory, e.g. on the one hand it is much weaker than full choice, and on the other hand much can be said or at least this is what the present work tries to indicate. In particular, we prove that for a sequence δ¯=⟨δs:s∈Y⟩,cf\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} (...) \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\overline{\delta} = \langle\delta_{s}: s \in Y\rangle, {\rm cf}}$$\end{document} large enough compared to Y, we can prove the pcf theorem with minor changes.We then deduce the existence of covering numbers and define and prove existence of a class of true successor cardinals. Using this we give some diagonalization arguments on Abelian groups, chosen as a characteristic case.We end by showing that some such consequences hold even in ZF above. (shrink)

We examine George Boolos's proposed abstraction principle for extensions based on the limitation-of-size conception, New V, from several perspectives. Crispin Wright once suggested that New V could serve as part of a neo-logicist development of real analysis. We show that it fails both of the conservativeness criteria for abstraction principles that Wright proposes. Thus, we support Boolos against Wright. We also show that, when combined with the axioms for Boolos's iterative notion of set, New V yields a system equivalent to (...) full Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with a principle of global choice. This advances Boolos's longstanding interest in the foundations of set theory. (shrink)

CZF is an intuitionistic set theory that does not contain Power Set, substituting instead a weaker version, Subset Collection. In this paper a Kripke model of CZF is presented in which Power Set is false. In addition, another Kripke model is presented of CZF with Subset Collection replaced by Exponentiation, in which Subset Collection fails.

According to a theorem due to Kenneth Kunen, under ZFC, there is no ordinal [Formula: see text] and nontrivial elementary embedding [Formula: see text]. His proof relied on the Axiom of Choice (AC), and no proof from ZF alone is has been discovered. [Formula: see text] is the assertion, introduced by Hugh Woodin, that [Formula: see text] is an ordinal and there is an elementary embedding [Formula: see text] with critical point [Formula: see text]. And [Formula: see text] asserts that (...) [Formula: see text] holds for some [Formula: see text]. The axiom [Formula: see text] is one of the strongest large cardinals not known to be inconsistent with AC. It is usually studied assuming ZFC in the full universe [Formula: see text] (in which case [Formula: see text] must be a limit ordinal), but we assume only ZF. We prove, assuming ZF [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] “[Formula: see text] is an even ordinal”, that there is a proper class transitive inner model [Formula: see text] containing [Formula: see text] and satisfying ZF [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] “there is an elementary embedding [Formula: see text]”; in fact we will have [Formula: see text] ⊆[Formula: see text], where [Formula: see text] witnesses [Formula: see text] in [Formula: see text]. This result was first proved by the author under the added assumption that [Formula: see text] exists; Gabe Goldberg noticed that this extra assumption was unnecessary. If also [Formula: see text] is a limit ordinal and [Formula: see text]-DC holds in [Formula: see text], then the model [Formula: see text] will also satisfy [Formula: see text]-DC. We show that ZFC [Formula: see text] “[Formula: see text] is even” [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text] implies [Formula: see text] exists for every [Formula: see text], but if consistent, this theory does not imply [Formula: see text] exists. (shrink)

This paper contributes to the generalization of lattice-valued models of set theory to non-classical contexts. First, we show that there are infinitely many complete bounded distributive lattices, which are neither Boolean nor Heyting algebra, but are able to validate the negation-free fragment of \. Then, we build lattice-valued models of full \, whose internal logic is weaker than intuitionistic logic. We conclude by using these models to give an independence proof of the Foundation axiom from \.

It is well known that, in a topological space, the open sets can be characterized using ?lter convergence. In ZF , we cannot replace filters by ultrafilters. It is proven that the ultra?lter convergence determines the open sets for every topological space if and only if the Ultrafilter Theorem holds. More, we can also prove that the Ultra?lter Theorem is equivalent to the fact that uX = kX for every topological space X, where k is the usual Kuratowski closure operator (...) and u is the Ultra?lter Closure with uX := {x ∈ X: [U converges to x and A ∈ U ]}. However, it is possible to built a topological space X for which uX ≠ kX, but the open sets are characterized by the ultra?lter convergence. To do so, it is proved that if every set has a free ultra?lter, then the Axiom of Countable Choice holds for families of non-empty finite sets. It is also investigated under which set theoretic conditions the equality u = k is true in some subclasses of topological spaces, such as metric spaces, second countable T0-spaces or {ℝ}. (shrink)

A Hausdorff space is called effectively Hausdorff if there exists a function F—called a Hausdorff operator—such that, for every with,, where U and V are disjoint open neighborhoods of x and y, respectively. Among other results, we establish the following in, i.e., in Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory without the Axiom of Choice (): is equivalent to “For every set X, the Cantor cube is effectively Hausdorff”. This enhances the result of Howard, Keremedis, Rubin and Rubin [13] that is equivalent to “Hausdorff (...) spaces are effectively Hausdorff” in. The Boolean Prime Ideal Theorem and the statement “For every infinite set X, the Stone space of the Boolean algebra is effectively Hausdorff” are mutually independent. In particular, the latter statement is not provable in. The Axiom of Choice for non‐empty subsets of () is equivalent to each of “Separable Hausdorff spaces are effectively Hausdorff” and “The Cantor cube is effectively Hausdorff”. The Principle of Dependent Choices in conjunction with the Axiom of Choice for continuum sized families of non‐empty subsets of does not imply the axiom of choice for partitions of. The latter independence result fills the gap in information in Howard and Rubin's book “Consequences of the Axiom of Choice”. The axiom of countable choice for non‐empty subsets of is equivalent to each of “Denumerable Hausdorff spaces are effectively Hausdorff”, “Denumerable T3 spaces are completely normal” and “Denumerable Tychonoff spaces are Urysohn”. (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)

We define a generic Vopěnka cardinal to be an inaccessible cardinal \ such that for every first-order language \ of cardinality less than \ and every set \ of \-structures, if \ and every structure in \ has cardinality less than \, then an elementary embedding between two structures in \ exists in some generic extension of V. We investigate connections between generic Vopěnka cardinals in models of ZFC and the number and complexity of \-Suslin sets of reals in models (...) of ZF. In particular, we show that ZFC + is equiconsistent with ZF + \\) where \ is the pointclass of all \-Suslin sets of reals, and also with ZF + \\) + \\) where \ is the least ordinal that is not a surjective image of the reals. (shrink)

We define a generic Vopěnka cardinal to be an inaccessible cardinal \ such that for every first-order language \ of cardinality less than \ and every set \ of \-structures, if \ and every structure in \ has cardinality less than \, then an elementary embedding between two structures in \ exists in some generic extension of V. We investigate connections between generic Vopěnka cardinals in models of ZFC and the number and complexity of \-Suslin sets of reals in models (...) of ZF. In particular, we show that ZFC + is equiconsistent with ZF + \\) where \ is the pointclass of all \-Suslin sets of reals, and also with ZF + \\) + \\) where \ is the least ordinal that is not a surjective image of the reals. (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 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)

One of the main results of Gödel [4] and [5] is that, if M is a transitive set such that $\langle M, \epsilon \rangle$ is a model of ZF (Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory) and α is the least ordinal not in M, then $\langle L_\alpha, \epsilon \rangle$ is also a model of ZF. In this note we shall use the Jensen uniformisation theorem to show that results analogous to the above hold for certain subsystems of ZF. The subsystems we have in (...) mind are those that are formed by restricting the formulas in the separation and replacement axioms to various levels of the Levy hierarchy. This is all done in § 1. In § 2 we proceed to establish the exact order relationships which hold among the ordinals of the minimal models of some of the systems discussed in § 1. Although the proofs of these latter results will not require any use of the uniformisation theorem, we will find it convenient to use some of the more elementary results and techniques from Jensen's fine-structural theory of L. We thus provide a brief review of the pertinent parts of Jensen's works in § 0, where a list of general preliminaries is also furnished. We remark that some of the techniques which we use in the present paper have been used by us previously in [6] to prove various results about β-models of analysis. Since β-models for analysis are analogous to transitive models for set theory, this is not surprising. (shrink)

We prove that the diagonalizable algebras of PA and ZF are not isomorphic.

The theory New Foundations of Quine was introduced in [14]. This theory is finitely axiomatizable as it has been proved in [9]. A similar result is shown in [8] using a system called K. Particular subsystems of NF, inspired by [8] and [9], have models in ZF. Very little is known about subsystems of NF satisfying typical properties of ZF; for example in [11] it is shown that the existence of some sets which appear naturally in ZF is an axiom (...) independent from NF . Here we discuss a model of subsystems of NF in which there is a set which is a model of ZF. MSC: 03E70. (shrink)

Constructive and intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theories are axiomatic theories of sets in the style of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (ZF) which are based on intuitionistic logic. They were introduced in the 1970's and they represent a formal context within which to codify mathematics based on intuitionistic logic. They are formulated on the basis of the standard first order language of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory and make no direct use of inherently constructive ideas. In working in constructive and intuitionistic ZF we can thus (...) to some extent rely on our familiarity with ZF and its heuristics. -/- Notwithstanding the similarities with classical set theory, the concepts of set defined by constructive and intuitionistic set theories differ considerably from that of the classical tradition; they also differ from each other. The techniques utilised to work within them, as well as to obtain metamathematical results about them, also diverge in some respects from the classical tradition because of their commitment to intuitionistic logic. In fact, as is common in intuitionistic settings, a plethora of semantic and proof-theoretic methods are available for the study of constructive and intuitionistic set theories. -/- The entry introduces the main features of Constructive and Intuitionistic ZF and offers links to the relevant bibliography. (shrink)

Let {: i ∈I } be a family of compact spaces and let X be their Tychonoff product. [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C] denotes the family of all basic non-trivial closed subsets of X and [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R denotes the family of all closed subsets H = V × Πmath imageXi of X, where V is a non-trivial closed subset of Πmath imageXi and QH is a finite non-empty subset of I. We show: Every filterbase ℋ ⊂ [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL (...) C]R extends to a [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R-ultrafilter ℱ if and only if every family H ⊂ [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C] with the finite intersection property extends to a maximal [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C] family F with the fip. The proposition “if every filterbase ℋ ⊂ [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R extends to a [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R-ultrafilter ℱ, then X is compact” is not provable in ZF. The statement “for every family {: i ∈ I } of compact spaces, every filterbase ℋ ⊂ [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R, Y = Πi ∈IYi, extends to a [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R-ultrafilter ℱ” is equivalent to Tychonoff's compactness theorem. The statement “for every family {: i ∈ ω } of compact spaces, every countable filterbase ℋ ⊂ [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R, X = Πi ∈ωXi, extends to a [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C]R-ultrafilter ℱ” is equivalent to Tychonoff's compactness theorem restricted to countable families. The countable Axiom of Choice is equivalent to the proposition “for every family {: i ∈ ω } of compact topological spaces, every countable family ℋ ⊂ [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C] with the fip extends to a maximal [MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL C] family ℱ with the fip”. (shrink)

Natural Formalization proposes a concrete way of expanding proof theory from the meta-mathematical investigation of formal theories to an examination of “the concept of the specifically mathematical proof.” Formal proofs play a role for this examination in as much as they reflect the essential structure and systematic construction of mathematical proofs. We emphasize three crucial features of our formal inference mechanism: (1) the underlying logical calculus is built for reasoning with gaps and for providing strategic directions, (2) the mathematical frame (...) is a definitional extension of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory and has a hierarchically organized structure of concepts and operations, and (3) the construction of formal proofs is deeply connected to the frame through rules for definitions and lemmas. To bring these general ideas to life, we examine, as a case study, proofs of the Cantor–Bernstein Theorem that do not appeal to the principle of choice. A thorough analysis of the multitude of “different” informal proofs seems to reduce them to exactly one. The natural formalization confirms that there is one proof, but that it comes in two variants due to Dedekind and Zermelo, respectively. In this way it enhances the conceptual understanding of the represented informal proofs. The formal, computational work is carried out with the proof search system AProS that serves as a proof assistant and implements the above inference mechanism; it can be fully inspected at (see link below). (shrink)

Andrzej Kisielewicz has proposed three systems of double extension set theory of which we have shown two to be inconsistent in an earlier paper. Kisielewicz presented an argument that the remaining system interprets ZF, which is defective: it actually shows that the surviving possibly consistent system of double extension set theory interprets ZF with Separation and Comprehension restricted to 0 formulas. We show that this system does interpret ZF, using an analysis of the structure of the ordinals.