Is this set a variation of Russell's paradox?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

[tex]M = \{x : x \notin M \}[/tex]

I understand this formulation a lot more than

[tex]R = \{S : S \notin S\}[/tex]

because I don't understand how, for example, 1 is a member of itself. Is 1 a set? Are all numbers sets?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Set M of all elements not in M

Loading...

Similar Threads - elements | Date |
---|---|

I Can an ordered pair have identical elements? | Dec 18, 2016 |

I Why can sets contain duplicate elements? | Nov 13, 2015 |

Examples of A intersection B being an element of A | Oct 30, 2014 |

What is the precise definition of, "Differs in exactly one element"? | Sep 11, 2014 |

How many subsets are there of a set consisting of n elements? | Sep 4, 2014 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**