Axiom of Foundation: The Limitations and Implications for Sets in Mathematics

  • Level: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter quantum123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axiom
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
2 replies · 3K views
quantum123
Messages
306
Reaction score
1
Why does the axiom of foundation not allow this?

[tex]a_1 \in a_2 \in a_3 \in a_4 \in a_1[/tex] ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The axiom of regularity (foundation) states that every non-empty set A contains an element disjoint from A.

If it's possible, then [tex]A = \{a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4\}[/tex] is a set, so A contains an element disjoint from A. It's not [tex]a_1[/tex], since [tex]a_4 \in a_1[/tex], it's not [tex]a_2[/tex], since [tex]a_1 \in a_2[/tex], it's not [tex]a_3[/tex], since [tex]a_2 \in a_3[/tex], and it's not [tex]a_4[/tex], since [tex]a_3 \in a_4[/tex]; a contradiction. Hence it's not possible.

This can be generalized to infinite sequences as shown below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_of_regularity#No_infinite_descending_sequence_of_sets_exists
Alternatively for you case then, this expands to an infinite sequence [tex]... \in a_3 \in a_4 \in a_1 \in a_2 \in a_3 \in a_4 \in a_1[/tex] which is impossible by the reasons given in the link.
 
Last edited:
wow, I like the first argument using [tex]A = \{a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4\}[/tex] !
thank you so much.
ingenius and beautiful :)