What is X? Ordered Proper-Class-Sized Sequence

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dragonfall
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of an ordered, proper-class-sized sequence denoted as a=(a_0,a_1,...,a_{\omega},...,a_{\omega_2},...,a_{\omega_{\omega}},...) where a_i, i∈Ord are integers from 0 to 9. It explores the implications of ordering these sequences lexicographically and concludes that the class X, which represents these sequences, cannot be a proper class due to its containment of proper classes. The discussion suggests that X should be classified as a "second order class" and emphasizes the impossibility of having a class X that encompasses every linearly ordered set as a subset.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of ordered sets and proper classes in set theory
  • Familiarity with lexicographic ordering and its applications
  • Basic knowledge of type theory and its terminology
  • Concept of isomorphism in mathematical structures
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "lexicographic ordering in set theory" for deeper insights
  • Study "proper classes vs. sets" to clarify foundational concepts
  • Explore "type theory and second order classes" for advanced understanding
  • Investigate "isomorphism in ordered sets" to grasp structural relationships
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, logicians, and students of advanced set theory seeking to understand the complexities of ordered classes and their implications in mathematical structures.

Dragonfall
Messages
1,023
Reaction score
5
This may be a little hand-wavy:

Let a be an ordered, proper-class-sized sequence a=(a_0,a_1,...,a_{\omega},...,a_{\omega_2},...,a_{\omega_{\omega}},...) where a_i, i\in\mathbb{O}rd are, say, 0,...,9. So that if we look only at those a whose expansion on a_{\omega} onwards are 0, we'd get something like the real numbers.

We order these things lexicographically (or antilexicographically, whichever it is that the reals are ordered by, I can never remember). So let X be the class of these things. What is X?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I just realized that X can't technically be a proper class since X contains proper classes. Formally we'll have to invoke some sort of type theory argument and call X a "second order class" or something. But that's just a technicality.
 
I think what I mean is that "there is no class X such that every linearly ordered set is isomorphic to a subset of X".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
11K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K