Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In set theory, a universal set is a set which contains all objects, including itself. [1] In set theory as usually formulated, it can be proven in multiple ways that a universal set does not exist. However, some non-standard variants of set theory include a universal set.
Within homotopy type theory, a set may be regarded as a homotopy 0-type, with universal properties of sets arising from the inductive and recursive properties of higher inductive types. Principles such as the axiom of choice and the law of the excluded middle can be formulated in a manner corresponding to the classical formulation in set theory ...
Further, since set theory was seen as the basis for an axiomatic development of all other branches of mathematics, Russell's paradox threatened the foundations of mathematics as a whole. This motivated a great deal of research around the turn of the 20th century to develop a consistent (contradiction-free) set theory.
Zermelo set theory was successful precisely because it was capable of axiomatising "ordinary" mathematics, fulfilling the programme begun by Cantor over 30 years earlier. But Zermelo set theory proved insufficient for the further development of axiomatic set theory and other work in the foundations of mathematics, especially model theory.
A true universal set is not included in standard set theory (see Paradoxes below), but is included in some non-standard set theories. Given a universal set U and a subset A of U, the complement of A (in U) is defined as A C := {x ∈ U | x ∉ A}.
It is the algebra of the set-theoretic operations of union, intersection and complementation, and the relations of equality and inclusion. For a basic introduction to sets see the article on sets, for a fuller account see naive set theory, and for a full rigorous axiomatic treatment see axiomatic set theory.
The actual solution of the “mystery” — or rather the nested set of mysteries — is rather simple, once one swallows the central speculative sci-fi aspect, which, with multiverse theory ...
In other set theories, such as New Foundations or the theory of semisets, the concept of "proper class" still makes sense (not all classes are sets) but the criterion of sethood is not closed under subsets. For example, any set theory with a universal set has proper classes which are subclasses of sets.