ZFC .... Axioms of Foundation .... and Infinity ....

In summary: The statement in the text we are trying to match is:there exists ##n## such that no member of ##f(n)## is in ##f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )##. ... That is equivalent tothere exists ##n## such that ##f(n)\cap f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )=\emptyset##. ... The foundation axiom isif ##A## is non-empty then there exists ##a \in A## such that ##a\cap A=\emptyset##. ... Now substitute ## f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )## for ##A## and ##f(
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,990
48
I am reading D. J. H. Garling's book: "A Course in Mathematical Analysis: Volume 1: Foundations and Elementary Real Analysis" ... ...

I am at present focused on Part 1: Prologue: The Foundations of Analysis ... Chapter 1: The Axioms of Set Theory ...

I need help with an aspect of the proof of Proposition 1.7.5 ...

Proposition 1.7.5 reads as follows:
?temp_hash=b76931c3b3d3d72ef267167009d99a51.png
In the above proof we read the following:

"By the foundation axiom, there exists ##n \in \mathbb{Z}^+## such that no member of ##f(n)## is in ##f( \mathbb{Z}^+ )##. ... ... "

Can someone please explain how/why the foundation axiom implies that there exists ##n \in \mathbb{Z}^+## such that no member of ##f(n)## is in ##f( \mathbb{Z}^+ )##. ... ... ?

PeterNOTE:

To enable readers to follow the above post I am providing Garling's text on the foundation axiom and the axiom of infinity ... ...
?temp_hash=b76931c3b3d3d72ef267167009d99a51.png

?temp_hash=b76931c3b3d3d72ef267167009d99a51.png
 

Attachments

  • Garling - Proposition 1.7.5 ... ....png
    Garling - Proposition 1.7.5 ... ....png
    6.3 KB · Views: 481
  • Garling - 1 - Foundation Axiom ... Axiom of Infinity - PART 1 ... ....png
    Garling - 1 - Foundation Axiom ... Axiom of Infinity - PART 1 ... ....png
    25 KB · Views: 540
  • Garling - 2 - Foundation Axiom ... Axiom of Infinity - PART 2 ... ....png
    Garling - 2 - Foundation Axiom ... Axiom of Infinity - PART 2 ... ....png
    22.4 KB · Views: 560
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The claim can be re-stated as:

There exists an element ##n## of ##\mathcal Z^+## such that ##f(n)\cap f(\mathcal Z^+)=\emptyset\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad## (1)

Line up statement (1) next to the statement of the foundation axiom and see if you can find some substitutions to make to the foundation axiom to get (1). The substitution is not one-for-one exact, but the variation from exact substitution should not be too hard to negotiate.
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
  • #3
Hi Andrew ... sorry to be slow in replying ... had to travel interstate ...

Sorry to be slow Andrew ... but can you explain how ...

the statement that there exists an ##n \in \mathbb{Z}^+## such that ##f(n+) \notin f(n)## ...

is equivalent to ...

the statement that there exists an element ##n \in \mathbb{Z}^+## such that ##f(n) \cap f( \mathbb{Z}^+ ) = \emptyset## ...

Peter
 
  • #4
The statement in the text we are trying to match is:
Math Amateur said:
there exists ##n \in \mathcal{Z}^+## such that no member of ##f(n)## is in ##f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )##. ...
That is equivalent to
there exists ##n \in \mathcal{Z}^+## such that ##f(n)\cap f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )=\emptyset##. ...

The foundation axiom is
if ##A## is non-empty then there exists ##a \in A## such that ##a\cap A=\emptyset##. ...

Now substitute ## f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )## for ##A## and ##f(n)## for ##a## in that last one, to get
if ##f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )## is non-empty then there exists ##f(n) \in f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )## such that ##f(n)\cap f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )=\emptyset##. ...
and note that ##\mathcal{Z}^+## is non-empty by definition, hence so is ##f(\mathcal Z^+)##, and that if
  • there exists ##f(n)\in f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )## such that ##f(n)\cap f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )=\emptyset##; then
  • there exists ##n\in \mathcal Z^+## such that ##f(n)\cap f( \mathcal{Z}^+ )=\emptyset##
since "##\exists n\in\mathcal Z^+##" is logically equivalent to "##\exists f(n)\in f(\mathcal Z^+)##", given that the domain of ##f## contains ##\mathcal Z^+##.

Note also that the Z is ##\mathcal Z##, which is not the integers ##\mathbb Z## (although he may end up identifying it with the positive integers later on). The TeX code around the Z is \mathcal rather than \mathbb.
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
  • #5
Thanks so much for the help, Andrew ... clear now ...

Peter
 

1. What does ZFC stand for in mathematics?

ZFC stands for "Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with Choice". It is a standard system of axioms used in modern mathematics to study the properties of sets.

2. What are the Axioms of Foundation in ZFC?

The Axioms of Foundation, also known as the Axiom of Regularity, state that every non-empty set contains an element that is disjoint from the set itself. In other words, it prevents the existence of infinite descending chains of sets.

3. What is the significance of the Axioms of Foundation in set theory?

The Axioms of Foundation ensure that the concept of a set is well-defined and avoids paradoxes, such as Russel's paradox. It also allows for the construction of the ordinal and cardinal numbers, which are essential in understanding the size and ordering of sets.

4. How does ZFC handle the concept of infinity?

ZFC includes the Axiom of Infinity, which states that there exists at least one set that contains the empty set and is closed under the operation of adding one more element. This allows for the existence of infinite sets and the study of infinite structures in mathematics.

5. Are there any controversies surrounding ZFC and its axioms?

There have been debates and discussions about the use of the Axiom of Choice, which is one of the axioms in ZFC. Some mathematicians believe that it leads to counterintuitive results, while others argue that it is necessary for certain proofs. Overall, ZFC remains a widely accepted and useful system of axioms in mathematics.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top