Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Consistency=== [[Gödel's second incompleteness theorem]] says that a recursively axiomatizable system that can interpret [[Robinson arithmetic]] can prove its own consistency only if it is inconsistent. Moreover, Robinson arithmetic can be interpreted in [[general set theory]], a small fragment of ZFC. Hence the [[consistency proof|consistency]] of ZFC cannot be proved within ZFC itself (unless it is actually inconsistent). Thus, to the extent that ZFC is identified with ordinary mathematics, the consistency of ZFC cannot be demonstrated in ordinary mathematics. The consistency of ZFC does follow from the existence of a weakly [[inaccessible cardinal]], which is unprovable in ZFC if ZFC is consistent. Nevertheless, it is deemed unlikely that ZFC harbors an unsuspected contradiction; it is widely believed that if ZFC were inconsistent, that fact would have been uncovered by now. This much is certain{{snd}}ZFC is immune to the classic paradoxes of [[naive set theory]]: [[Russell's paradox]], the [[Burali-Forti paradox]], and [[Cantor's paradox]]. {{harvtxt|Abian|LaMacchia|1978}} studied a [[subtheory]] of ZFC consisting of the axioms of extensionality, union, powerset, replacement, and choice. Using [[model theory|models]], they proved this subtheory consistent, and proved that each of the axioms of extensionality, replacement, and power set is independent of the four remaining axioms of this subtheory. If this subtheory is augmented with the axiom of infinity, each of the axioms of union, choice, and infinity is independent of the five remaining axioms. Because there are non-well-founded models that satisfy each axiom of ZFC except the axiom of regularity, that axiom is independent of the other ZFC axioms. If consistent, ZFC cannot prove the existence of the [[inaccessible cardinal]]s that [[category theory]] requires. Huge sets of this nature are possible if ZF is augmented with [[Tarski–Grothendieck set theory|Tarski's axiom]].{{sfn|Tarski|1939}} Assuming that axiom turns the axioms of [[axiom of infinity|infinity]], [[axiom of power set|power set]], and [[axiom of choice|choice]] (''7'' – ''9'' above) into theorems.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory
(section)
Add topic