Notation guide (adapted from Metamath):
โข ๐, a metavariable standing for any logical formula, abbreviates the conjunction of all hypotheses listed for a given proposition; writing each line as โข (๐ โ โฆ) puts the theorem in "deduction form," which can be easier to apply in #Metamath.
โข โข ๐ asserts that ๐ is true; the turnstile is descended from #Frege's own Urteilsstrich (judgment stroke).
โข ๐ด๐ ๐ต means the ordered pair โจ๐ด, ๐ตโฉ is an element of ๐ , or we could say ๐ต immediately follows ๐ด
โข ๐ต = (๐ โ๐ด) means ๐ต is the unique set such that ๐ด๐ ๐ต is true (when such a ๐ต exists) which means ๐ is function-like when restricted to operating on the singleton {๐ด}
โข (๐ โ๐ด) is the image of ๐ด
โข dom ๐ is the domain of ๐ , the class of all sets ๐ฅ such that there is a set ๐ฆ that would make ๐ฅ๐ ๐ฆ true.
โข Fun ๐ is true when ๐ is function-like for all sets in its domain.
โข โก๐ is the converse of ๐ so ๐ดโก๐ ๐ต iff ๐ต๐ ๐ด
โข (tcโ๐ ) is the #TransitiveClosure of ๐ (Metamath uses (t+โ๐ ) which can be awkward.) Whitehead and Russell use the term ancestral to describe how ๐ด(tcโ๐ )๐ต means ๐ด is some โancestorโ of ๐ต. Alternately, we can say ๐ต eventually follows ๐ด.
โข V is the universal class, every set is a member, and only sets may be members of any class. After Fregeโs later work ran into Russellโs Paradox, it was discovered that not every class {๐ฅ | ๐} makes sense as a set and so we need the hypothesis โข (๐ โ ๐ด โ V) before we can talk about the function value of ๐ด or the ordered pair โจ๐ด, ๐ตโฉ being an element of ๐ . V is not italic because it is a constant symbol, like tc, dom, and Fun.
Begriffsschrift (1879), is one of the first manuscripts on #SymbolicLogic. As such, it literally invents a new language to describe the subjects the author, #GottlobFrege, wants to introduce. And this notation is very unlike what we see in math before or after this.
So I will list some theorems adapted (by me, circa 2020) from #Frege with proper set-theoretical bounds.
So, just double-checking how #Lean4 and #Mathlib work:
* Lean takes 3GiB of RAM and a minute to open Mathlib
* Lean requires about 10min to build itself in CI, only verifying required theorems
* Verifying all of Mathlib is measured in hours
* Lean's kernel is untrustworthy due to junk theorems
And yet I'm a clown for using #Metamath? At some point we ought to reconsider the type-theory fetish.
Every well-ordered set is isomorphic to an ordinal. Common notion, for example see Introduction to https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.07352
โข((๐ดโVโง๐ We๐ด)โโ๐(dom๐โOnโง๐IsomE,๐ (dom๐,๐ด)))
\[ \vdash ( ( A \in \mathrm{V} \wedge R \mathrm{We} A ) \leftrightarrow \exists f ( \mathrm{dom} f \in \mathrm{On} \wedge f \mathrm{Isom} \mathrm{E} , R ( \mathrm{dom} f , A ) ) ) \]
Every well-ordered set is isomorphic to
a unique ordinal.
โข((๐ดโVโง๐ We๐ด)โโ!๐โOnโ๐โ(๐ดโโ๐)๐IsomE,๐ (๐,๐ด))
\[ \vdash ( ( A \in \mathrm{V} \wedge R \mathrm{We} A ) \leftrightarrow \exists{!} o \in \mathrm{On} \exists f \in ( A \uparrow_\mathrm{m} o ) f \mathrm{Isom} \mathrm{E} , R ( o , A ) ) \]
We can phrase the Axiom of Choice as "Every set injects into an ordinal."
โข(CHOICEโโ๐ฅโ๐โOn๐ฅโผ๐)
\[ \vdash ( \mathrm{CHOICE} \leftrightarrow \forall x \exists o \in \mathrm{On} x \preccurlyeq o ) \]
@FishFace Update:
What I refer to as EScbO is usually called #LO the #LinearOrdering principle.
โข โy โa โ x โb โ x โc โ x (ยฌ aya โง ((ayb โง byc) โ ayc) โง (ayb โจ a = b โจ bya))
or using abbreviations in #Metamath
โข โy y Or x
I think AC implies LO, but LO is independent of DC and CC.
So we have { 1, 2 } โ Finโ โ Finโโ โ Finโ โ Finโ โ Finโ โ Finโ โ Finโ โ Finโ
If a set is in Finโ then it is considered finite by all the other definitions.
But since the axiom of choice is equivalent to saying every set can be well-ordered, if we accept it VII-finite sets are equinumerous with a finite ordinal and so Finโ โ Finโ and so the differences between these definitions collapse and ZF becomes ZFC, which is a widely accepted basis for Set Theory.
My consultation with math resources was inspired by a blog post:
https://www.infinitelymore.xyz/p/what-is-the-infinite
#Metamath #ZFC #SetTheory #AxiomOfChoice #FiniteSet #Infinity
Also from #Metamath I learned #infinity is hard to think about.
A . Lรฉvy in "The independence of various definitions of finiteness" Fundamenta Mathematicae, 46:1-13 (1958) established 8 distinct set-theoretic definitions of a #finiteSet which in ZF cannot be equated without the #AxiomOfChoice
I-finite -- equinumerous with a finite ordinal. // i.e. admits a finite well-order (Numerically Finite) โบ the powerset of its powerset is Dedekind finite โบ every collection of its subsets has a maximum element โบ every collection of subsets has a minimal element
Ia-finite -- not the union of two sets which are not I-finite
II-finite -- every possible way of finding within the set a chain of nested subsets always contains a maximum element (Tarski finite) โบ equivalently every such chain contains its intersection โบ (Linearly Finite) โบ (Stรคckel Finite)
|||-finite -- It's powerset is |V-finite finite, (weakly Dedekind finite) โบ cannot be mapped onto ordinal ฯ โบ doesn't contain a chain of subsets which can be placed in order with ฯ
|V-finite -- doesn't have a proper subset which is equinumerous to itself. (Dedekind finite) โบ there is no 1-1 map from ordinal ฯ to it โบ it is strictly dominated by the disjoint sum of it and a singleton (acts finite under successor)
V-finite -- it is either empty or strictly dominated by the disjoint sum of it with itself (acts finite under addition)
VI-finite -- it is either empty, a singleton or strictly dominated by the Cartesian product of it with itself (acts finite under multiplication)
VII-finite -- it cannot be infinitely well-ordered (not equiinumerous with the ordinal ฯ or any larger ordinal)
Keeping busy with Sudoku, Wordle, Crosswords, and mining textbooks for statements to practice proving in #Metamath ...
Inspired by this video playlist on #RealAnalysis #Math
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYPU-RArkLZNwMZ55-y8FZZEeY7zCJX59
Which was created from https://www.jirka.org/ra/ _Basic Analysis:
Introduction to Real Analysis_ by Jiลรญ Lebl. #JiลรญLebl a #CreativeCommons (4.0) free #math #textbook
In Metamath's compressed format, my proofs of strong induction over the natural numbers took 316 bytes, well-ordering of the natural numbers: 376 bytes, 2โฟโปยน โค n! : 1204 bytes, formula for finite sum of geometric series: 2566 bytes. The last has 147 steps, some of which are reused and some of which depend on up to 8 prior steps and on a truncated library of 30477 statements of syntax, axioms, definitions, and theorems from the wider world of Metamath.