What is the Inductive Property in Set Theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dragonfall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Property
AI Thread Summary
The inductive property in set theory states that a set X is defined such that if x is a subset of X, then x is also an element of X, distinguishing it from transitivity. The discussion explores the implications of this property, questioning the existence of such a set and suggesting that it leads to power-set closure. It is noted that the cardinality of the set is undefined, as it can include all subsets of an infinite set, thus encompassing its powerset and beyond. The conversation concludes that the closest axiomatic representation of this concept is "inductive." The exploration highlights the complexities and paradoxes involved in defining sets with this property.
Dragonfall
Messages
1,023
Reaction score
5
A set X is *this* iff whenever x is a subset of X, then x is also an element of X. Note that this is not transitivity.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Are you sure such a set exists? Wouldn't you have an injection from the class of ordinals to X if it had this property, like 0->x,1->{x},... ?
 
Last edited:
EDIT: Yes, you're right. Nevermind, this turned out to be power-set closure.
 
Last edited:
I think your set is empty.
1.) Let's discount subsets of one element, So if your set contains 0. Then it doesn't need to contain {0}, {{0}}, {{{0}}}, as well as {}, {{}}, {{{}}}...
2.) Now we can limit ourselves to subsets of order 2. We start with two elements a and b. This produces a chain of sets of type {a,b}, {a,{a,b}} {a,{a,{a,b}}} well map these onto \mathbb{N}
3.) We will now show that the cardinality of our set is undefined.
a) The cardinality of the set of all of an infinit set's subsets is one cardinality higher than that of the set.
b) 1 is part of the set and {1,2} is part of the set as well as {1,{2,3}} and {1,{2,{3,4}}} are part of the set; and we can go on producing chains of arbitrary elements with this brace pattern, so the set contains all subsets of \mathbb{N} (its powerset) but by the same argument it contains the powerset's powerset, and so on.
 
I believe the closest thing at the axiomatic level is "inductuve"

Since \mathbb{N} = \{ , \{\}, \{ , \{\}\}, \dots \}<br />

--Elucidus
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
12K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top