Notation guide (adapted from Metamath):
β’ π, a metavariable standing for any logical formula, abbreviates the conjunction of all hypotheses listed for a given proposition; writing each line as β’ (π β β¦) puts the theorem in "deduction form," which can be easier to apply in #Metamath.
β’ β’ π asserts that π is true; the turnstile is descended from #Frege's own Urteilsstrich (judgment stroke).
β’ π΄π π΅ means the ordered pair β¨π΄, π΅β© is an element of π , or we could say π΅ immediately follows π΄
β’ π΅ = (π βπ΄) means π΅ is the unique set such that π΄π π΅ is true (when such a π΅ exists) which means π is function-like when restricted to operating on the singleton {π΄}
β’ (π βπ΄) is the image of π΄
β’ dom π is the domain of π , the class of all sets π₯ such that there is a set π¦ that would make π₯π π¦ true.
β’ Fun π is true when π is function-like for all sets in its domain.
β’ β‘π is the converse of π so π΄β‘π π΅ iff π΅π π΄
β’ (tcβπ ) is the #TransitiveClosure of π (Metamath uses (t+βπ ) which can be awkward.) Whitehead and Russell use the term ancestral to describe how π΄(tcβπ )π΅ means π΄ is some βancestorβ of π΅. Alternately, we can say π΅ eventually follows π΄.
β’ V is the universal class, every set is a member, and only sets may be members of any class. After Fregeβs later work ran into Russellβs Paradox, it was discovered that not every class {π₯ | π} makes sense as a set and so we need the hypothesis β’ (π β π΄ β V) before we can talk about the function value of π΄ or the ordered pair β¨π΄, π΅β© being an element of π . 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
β’((π΄βVβ§π Weπ΄)ββπ(domπβOnβ§πIsomE,π (domπ,π΄)))
\[ \vdash ( ( A \in \mathrm{V} \wedge R \mathrm{We} A ) \leftrightarrow \exists f ( \mathrm{dom} f \in \mathrm{On} \wedge f \mathrm{Isom} \mathrm{E} , R ( \mathrm{dom} f , A ) ) ) \]
Every well-ordered set is isomorphic to
a unique ordinal.
β’((π΄βVβ§π Weπ΄)ββ!πβOnβπβ(π΄ββπ)πIsomE,π (π,π΄))
\[ \vdash ( ( A \in \mathrm{V} \wedge R \mathrm{We} A ) \leftrightarrow \exists{!} o \in \mathrm{On} \exists f \in ( A \uparrow_\mathrm{m} o ) f \mathrm{Isom} \mathrm{E} , R ( o , A ) ) \]
We can phrase the Axiom of Choice as "Every set injects into an ordinal."
β’(CHOICEββπ₯βπβOnπ₯βΌπ)
\[ \vdash ( \mathrm{CHOICE} \leftrightarrow \forall x \exists o \in \mathrm{On} x \preccurlyeq o ) \]
@FishFace Update:
What I refer to as EScbO is usually called #LO the #LinearOrdering principle.
β’ βy βa β x βb β x βc β x (Β¬ aya β§ ((ayb β§ byc) β ayc) β§ (ayb β¨ a = b β¨ bya))
or using abbreviations in #Metamath
β’ βy y Or x
I think AC implies LO, but LO is independent of DC and CC.
So we have { 1, 2 } β Finβ β Finββ β Finβ β Finβ β Finβ β Finβ β Finβ β Finβ
If a set is in Finβ 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 Finβ β Finβ 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 . LΓ©vy 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) βΊ the powerset of its powerset is Dedekind finite βΊ every collection of its subsets has a maximum element βΊ 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) βΊ equivalently every such chain contains its intersection βΊ (Linearly Finite) βΊ (StΓ€ckel Finite)
|||-finite -- It's powerset is |V-finite finite, (weakly Dedekind finite) βΊ cannot be mapped onto ordinal Ο βΊ doesn't contain a chain of subsets which can be placed in order with Ο
|V-finite -- doesn't have a proper subset which is equinumerous to itself. (Dedekind finite) βΊ there is no 1-1 map from ordinal Ο to it βΊ 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 Ο 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 JiΕΓ Lebl. #JiΕΓLebl 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, 2βΏβ»ΒΉ β€ 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.