Is this true, if so is it obvious?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dragonfall
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 2K views
Dragonfall
Messages
1,023
Reaction score
5
There is no proper class such X such that every totally ordered set is isomorphic to a subclass of X.

I'm using "proper class" and "isomorphic" rather liberally here, but you can assume them to be formulas in ZFC, or something.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
? What about the class of all sets? Every set is a subclass of that, so certainly every totally ordered set is a subclass of it... Also, if you want something stricter; since the class of all sets is a class, you can consider the class of all totally ordered sets. Is your question whether or not that is a proper class? I'd think that it would be, but the way you asked your question, it sounds like the class of all sets should satisfy your requirement.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here?
 
Last edited:
No, you're right.