12 Jan 05:00
Re: [Thomas Forster] Re: [FOM] Historical Queries on AC
From: Andrzej Trybulec <trybulec <at> math.uwb.edu.pl>
Subject: Re: [Thomas Forster] Re: [FOM] Historical Queries on AC
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.mathematics.mizar
Date: 2008-01-12 04:00:47 GMT
Subject: Re: [Thomas Forster] Re: [FOM] Historical Queries on AC
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.mathematics.mizar
Date: 2008-01-12 04:00:47 GMT
Jesse Alama wrote:
>Judging from Forster's reaction and questions that I've received from
>subscribers to the FOM mailing list concerning my post on TG, it looks
>like there's some surprise that Choice is a theorem of TG. The surprise
>is that the universe axiom implies AC. That was my intuition as well;
>those two don't seem to be related to each other. Can anyone provide an
>intuitive sketch of why that follows?
>
>
>
I am so sorry. My previous message was an answer rather to Thomas
Forster's question:
>You mean that if there is a proper class of strong inaccessibles then AC
>follows..? Surely you can't mean that!?!
Original proof of Tarski is formalised in WELLSET1. But the Grzegorz's proof (WELLORD2) is based on a quite
simple idea. Let U be a universe (CLASSES2), consider
On U
the set of all ordinal numbers in U, it does not belong to U, so U and On U are equipotent.
But On U is well-ordred, so U is well-ordered, too.
U is transitive, every set that belongs to U is well-ordered as well.
Regards,
Andrzej
>
RSS Feed