Results 1 
6 of
6
The Mathematical Development Of Set Theory  From Cantor To Cohen
 The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
, 1996
"... This article is dedicated to Professor Burton Dreben on his coming of age. I owe him particular thanks for his careful reading and numerous suggestions for improvement. My thanks go also to Jose Ruiz and the referee for their helpful comments. Parts of this account were given at the 1995 summer meet ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This article is dedicated to Professor Burton Dreben on his coming of age. I owe him particular thanks for his careful reading and numerous suggestions for improvement. My thanks go also to Jose Ruiz and the referee for their helpful comments. Parts of this account were given at the 1995 summer meeting of the Association for Symbolic Logic at Haifa, in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology logic seminar, and to the Paris Logic Group. The author would like to express his thanks to the various organizers, as well as his gratitude to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem for its hospitality during the preparation of this article in the autumn of 1995.
The Mathematical Import Of Zermelo's WellOrdering Theorem
 Bull. Symbolic Logic
, 1997
"... this paper, the seminal results of set theory are woven together in terms of a unifying mathematical motif, one whose transmutations serve to illuminate the historical development of the subject. The motif is foreshadowed in Cantor's diagonal proof, and emerges in the interstices of the inclusi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
this paper, the seminal results of set theory are woven together in terms of a unifying mathematical motif, one whose transmutations serve to illuminate the historical development of the subject. The motif is foreshadowed in Cantor's diagonal proof, and emerges in the interstices of the inclusion vs. membership distinction, a distinction only clarified at the turn of this century, remarkable though this may seem. Russell runs with this distinction, but is quickly caught on the horns of his wellknown paradox, an early expression of our motif. The motif becomes fully manifest through the study of functions f :
An Editor Recalls Some Hopeless Papers
, 1998
"... set theory' [12] as his source, and another refers to Barrow `Theories of everything' [2]. One contents himself with references to two earlier unpublished papers of his own. Others give no source. For definiteness let me write down a proof, not in Cantor's words, which contains all t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
set theory' [12] as his source, and another refers to Barrow `Theories of everything' [2]. One contents himself with references to two earlier unpublished papers of his own. Others give no source. For definiteness let me write down a proof, not in Cantor's words, which contains all the points we shall need to comment on. (1) We claim first that for every map f from the set {1, 2, . . . } of positive integers to the open unit interval (0, 1) of the real numbers, there is some real number which is in (0, 1) but not in the image of f. (2) Assume that f is a map from the set of positive integers to (0, 1). (3) Write 0 . a n1 a n2 a n3 . . . for the decimal expansion of f(n), where each a ni is a numeral between 0 and 9. (Where it applies, we choose the expansion which is eventually 0, not that which is eventually 9.) (4) For each positive integer n, let b n be 5 if a nn #= 5, and 4 otherwise. (5) Let b be the real number whose decimal expansion is 0 . b 1 b 2 b 3 . . . . (6...
EXTENDING CANTOR’S PARADOX A CRITIQUE OF INFINITY AND SELFREFERENCE
, 809
"... Abstract. This paper examines infinity and selfreference from a critique perspective. Starting from an extension of Cantor Paradox that suggests the inconsistency of the actual infinite, the paper makes a short review of the controversial history of infinity and suggests several indicators of its i ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. This paper examines infinity and selfreference from a critique perspective. Starting from an extension of Cantor Paradox that suggests the inconsistency of the actual infinite, the paper makes a short review of the controversial history of infinity and suggests several indicators of its inconsistency. Semantic selfreference is also examined from the same critique perspective by comparing it with selfreferent sets. The platonic scenario of infinity and selfreference is finally criticized from a biological and neurobiological perspective. 1.
CORRECTING A MINOR ERROR IN CANTOR’S CALCULATION OF THE POWER OF THE CONTINUUM
, 2006
"... Abstract. Cantor’s algebraic calculation of the power of the continuum contains an easily repairable error related to Cantor own way of defining the addition of cardinal numbers. The appropriate correction is suggested. 1. The exponentiation of powers Cantor’s most significant contribution to the th ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Cantor’s algebraic calculation of the power of the continuum contains an easily repairable error related to Cantor own way of defining the addition of cardinal numbers. The appropriate correction is suggested. 1. The exponentiation of powers Cantor’s most significant contribution to the theory of transfinite numbers is, without a doubt, Beiträge zur Begründung der transfiniten Mengelehre 1. A memory of more than 70 pages divided into two parts which appeared in the Mathematische Annalen in the years 1895 and 1897 respectively ([4], [5]). Beiträge’s first six epigraphs are devoted to found the arithmetics of cardinals. Cantor begins by defining the concept of set and the union of disjoint sets, after which he proposes the following definition of power or cardinal number ([6], p. 86): We call by the name ”power ” or ”cardinal number ” of [the set] M the general concept which, by means of our active faculty of thought, arises from the set M when we make abstraction of the nature of its various elements m and of the order in which they are give.
THE EMPTY SET, THE SINGLETON, AND THE ORDERED PAIR AKIHIRO KANAMORI
, 2002
"... For the modern set theorist the empty set ∅, the singleton {a}, and the ordered pair 〈x, y 〉 are at the beginning of the systematic, axiomatic development of set theory, both as a field of mathematics and as a unifying framework for ongoing mathematics. These notions are the simplest building blocks ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
For the modern set theorist the empty set ∅, the singleton {a}, and the ordered pair 〈x, y 〉 are at the beginning of the systematic, axiomatic development of set theory, both as a field of mathematics and as a unifying framework for ongoing mathematics. These notions are the simplest building blocks in the abstract, generative conception of sets advanced by the initial axiomatization of Ernst Zermelo [1908a] and are quickly assimilated long before the complexities of Power Set, Replacement, and Choice are broached in the formal elaboration of the ‘set of ’ {} operation. So it is surprising that, while these notions are unproblematic today, they were once sources of considerable concern and confusion among leading pioneers of mathematical logic like Frege, Russell, Dedekind, and Peano. In the development of modern mathematical logic out of the turbulence of 19th century logic, the emergence of the empty set, the singleton, and the ordered pair as clear and elementary settheoretic concepts serves as a motif that reflects and illuminates larger and more significant developments in mathematical logic: