Set Theory — A Vehicle to Modern Mathematics in Poland

Author(s):  
Michael Shulman

Homotopy type theory and univalent foundations (HoTT/UF) is a new foundation of mathematics, based not on set theory but on “infinity-groupoids”, which consist of collections of objects, ways in which two objects can be equal, ways in which those ways-to-be-equal can be equal, ad infinitum. Though apparently complicated, such structures are increasingly important in mathematics. Philosophically, they are an inevitable result of the notion that whenever we form a collection of things, we must simultaneously consider when two of those things are the same. The “synthetic” nature of HoTT/UF enables a much simpler description of infinity groupoids than is available in set theory, thereby aligning with modern mathematics while placing “equality” back in the foundations of logic. This chapter will introduce the basic ideas of HoTT/UF for a philosophical audience, including Voevodsky’s univalence axiom and higher inductive types.


Author(s):  
John P. Burgess

In the late nineteenth century, Georg Cantor created mathematical theories, first of sets or aggregates of real numbers (or linear points), and later of sets or aggregates of arbitrary elements. The relationship of element a to set A is written a∈A; it is to be distinguished from the relationship of subset B to set A, which holds if every element of B is also an element of A, and which is written B⊆A. Cantor is most famous for his theory of transfinite cardinals, or numbers of elements in infinite sets. A subset of an infinite set may have the same number of elements as the set itself, and Cantor proved that the sets of natural and rational numbers have the same number of elements, which he called ℵ0; also that the sets of real and complex numbers have the same number of elements, which he called c. Cantor proved ℵ0 to be less than c. He conjectured that no set has a number of elements strictly between these two. In the early twentieth century, in response to criticism of set theory, Ernst Zermelo undertook its axiomatization; and, with amendments by Abraham Fraenkel, his have been the accepted axioms ever since. These axioms help distinguish the notion of a set, which is too basic to admit of informative definition, from other notions of a one made up of many that have been considered in logic and philosophy. Properties having exactly the same particulars as instances need not be identical, whereas sets having exactly the same elements are identical by the axiom of extensionality. Hence for any condition Φ there is at most one set {x|Φ(x)} whose elements are all and only those x such that Φ(x) holds, and {x|Φ(x)}={x|Ψ(x)} if and only if conditions Φ and Ψ hold of exactly the same x. It cannot consistently be assumed that {x|Φ(x)} exists for every condition Φ. Inversely, the existence of a set is not assumed to depend on the possibility of defining it by some condition Φ as {x|Φ(x)}. One set x0 may be an element of another set x1 which is an element of x2 and so on, x0∈x1∈x2∈…, but the reverse situation, …∈y2∈y1∈y0, may not occur, by the axiom of foundation. It follows that no set is an element of itself and that there can be no universal set y={x|x=x}. Whereas a part of a part of a whole is a part of that whole, an element of an element of a set need not be an element of that set. Modern mathematics has been greatly influenced by set theory, and philosophies rejecting the latter must therefore reject much of the former. Many set-theoretic notations and terminologies are encountered even outside mathematics, as in parts of philosophy: pair {a,b} {x|x=a or x=b} singleton {a} {x|x=a} empty set ∅ {x|x≠x} union ∪X {a|a∈A for some A∈X} binary union A∪B {a|a∈A or a∈B} intersection ∩X {a|a∈A for all A∈X} binary intersection A∩B {a|a∈A and a∈B} difference A−B {a|a∈A and not a∈B} complement A−B power set ℘(A) {B|B⊆A} (In contexts where only subsets of A are being considered, A-B may be written -B and called the complement of B.) While the accepted axioms suffice as a basis for the development not only of set theory itself, but of modern mathematics generally, they leave some questions about transfinite cardinals unanswered. The status of such questions remains a topic of logical research and philosophical controversy.


2012 ◽  
Vol 433-440 ◽  
pp. 6315-6318
Author(s):  
Xiao Gang Wang

Whether philosophy can realize mathematization has long been controversial. As the mathematics develops a nonquantative branch- structural mathematics, however, mathematization of philosophy has a turnaround. Broadspectrum philosophy which makes use of structural mathematics has established a generally applicable as well as precise mathematical model for many philosophical problems, giving a positive answer to whether the philosophy can be mathematized. Mathematizaiton of philosophy allows more accurate and clear distinction of people’s expression in meaning, gives ideas the visible characteristics, makes philosophy an analyzable discipline, and realizes routinization of philosophical methods. Hegel was well versed in mathematics but opposed “Extreme Mathematic Attitude”, since he thought recognizing all the objects from the mathematic standpoint of “Quantity or Quantitative Relationship” would ignore the qualitative difference among the objects.[1]P239 Hegel’s opinion was based on the traditional mathematic which takes the Quantitative Relationship as the foundation. Holding the same evidence as Hegel's, most philosophers nowadays still suspect that the philosophy can be mathematized. When the modern mathematics has developed a new nonquantative branch, the Structural Mathematics, the philosophy mathematization, however, meets a turning point. Opposed to Quantitative Mathematics, the Structural Mathematics focuses on research of mathematic relationship and structure on the basis of abstract set theory. Since the structural mathematics doesn't rely on quantity and quantitative relationship, it can be combined in research of philosophy which usually doesn’t possess quantitative characteristics. Establishment of Broadspectrum Philosophy is a successful attempt. With full application of set theory, symbolic logic, modern algebra, transformation group theory and graph theory, Broadspectrum Philosophy constructs a generally applicable as well as precise mathematical mode for many philosophical problems, bringing a fundamental change to the philosophy. This paper attempts to make some preliminary analysis on the significance of establishment of Broadspectrum Philosophy.


Author(s):  
Richard Earl

From the mid-19th century, topological understanding progressed on various fronts. ‘Flavours of topology’ considers other areas such as differential topology, algebraic topology, and combinatorial topology. Geometric topology concerned surfaces and grew out of the work of Euler, Möbius, Riemann, and others. General topology was more analytical and foundational in nature; Hausdorff was its most significant progenitor and its growth mirrored other fundamental work being done in set theory. The chapter introduces the hairy ball theorem, and the work of great French mathematician and physicist Henri Poincaré, which has been rigorously advanced over the last century, making algebraic topology a major theme of modern mathematics.


1958 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Lorenzen

A “foundational crisis” occurred already in Greek mathematics, brought about by the Pythagorean discovery of incommensurable quantities. It was Eudoxos who provided new foundations, and since then Greek mathematics has been unshakeable. If one reads modern mathematical textbooks, one is normally told that something very similar occurred in modern mathematics. The calculus invented in the seventeenth century had to go through a crisis caused by the use of divergent series. One is told that by the achievements of the nineteenth century from Cauchy to Cantor this crisis has definitely been overcome. It is well known, but it is nevertheless very often not taken seriously into account, that this is an illusion. The so-called ε-δ-definitions of the limit concepts are an admirable achievement, but they are only one step towards the goal of a final foundation of analysis. The nineteenth century solution of the problem of foundations consists of recognizing, in addition to the concept of natural number as the basis of arithmetic, another basic concept for analysis, namely the concept of set. By the inventors of set theory it was strongly held that these sets are self-evident to our intuition; but very soon the belief in their self-evidence was destroyed by the set-theoretic paradoxes. After that, about 1908, the period of axiomatic set theory began. In analogy to geometry there was put forward an uninterpreted system of axioms, a formal system. This, of course, is quite possible. A formal system contains strings of marks; and a special class of these strings, the class of the so-called “theorems”, is inductively defined.


1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 883-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bjarni Jónsson

A distinctive feature of modern mathematics is the interaction between its various branches and the blurring of the boundaries between different areas. This is strikingly illustrated in the work of Alfred Tarski. He was a logician first and an algebraist second. His contributions to algebra can be divided into three (ill-defined and overlapping) categories, general algebra, the study of various algebraic structures arising from problems outside algebra, mostly in logic and set theory, and the use of concepts and techniques from logic in the study of algebraic structures. Even more roughly, these three categories could be labeled as pure algebra, applications of algebra to logic, and applications of logic to algebra.Before Tarski came to the United States in 1939, he had written a series of papers on both the axiomatic and the structural aspects of Boolean algebras, and his inclination to algebraize mathematical problems is well illustrated by his paper [38g], Algebraische Fassung des Massproblems. Many of his later investigations of various types of algebraic structures are inspired by work done in this earlier period. However, beginning around 1940 there is a much greater emphasis on the study of algebra in its various aspects.The paper [41], On the calculus of relations, is a landmark event in this respect. The object here was to find an axiomatic basis for the arithmetic of binary relations. The axioms that he chose are simple and natural (see Monk [1986]).


2000 ◽  
Vol 84 (500) ◽  
pp. 362
Author(s):  
Graham Hoare ◽  
Jose Ferreiros

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document