Walter H. Schottky: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>Frietjes
 
en>Monkbot
Line 1: Line 1:
If you need to accelerate a PC then you have come to the right place. I will show you, now, five rapid ways to drastically improve your computer's performance.<br><br>So 1 day my computer suddenly started being weird. I was thus frustrated, because my files were lost, plus I cannot open the files that I needed, and then, suddenly, everything stopped working!<br><br>Although this problem affects millions of computer users throughout the world, there is an effortless method to fix it. You see, there's 1 reason for a slow loading computer, plus that's considering a PC cannot read the files it needs to run. In a nutshell, this simply means which when you do anything on Windows, it requires to read up on how to do it. It's traditionally a fairly 'dumb' system, which has to have files to tell it to do everything.<br><br>How to fix this problem is to initially reinstall the program(s) causing the errors. There are a great deal of different programs that employ this file, but one can have placed their own faulty version of the file onto a program. By reinstalling any programs that are causing the error, we will not just let a PC to run the program correctly, nevertheless a hot file can be placed onto the system - leaving your computer running as smoothly as possible again. If you try this, and find it does not work, then you need to look to update your system & any software we have on a PC. This will probably update the Msvcr71.dll file, permitting a computer to read it correctly again.<br><br>Whenever it comes to software, this is the vital piece because it is the one running the system plus different programs needed inside the functions. Always maintain the cleanliness of the program from obsolete information by getting a advantageous [http://bestregistrycleanerfix.com/system-mechanic system mechanic]. Protect it from a virus online by providing a workable virus security system. You should furthermore have a monthly clean up by running the defragmenter system. This method it might enhance the performance of your computer plus for you to avoid any errors. If you think anything is wrong with the software, and you don't learn how to fix it then refer to a technician.<br><br>Although I usually utilize the many recent variation of browser, sometimes different extensions plus plugins become the cause of errors with my browser and the system. The same is the story with my browser that was crashing frequently potentially due to the Flash player error.<br><br>Reboot PC - Simply reboot your PC to find if the error is gone. Frequently, rebooting the PC readjusts the internal settings and software and hence fixes the issue. If it doesn't then move on to follow the instructions under.<br><br>Frequently the greatest technique is to read reviews on them plus if numerous users remark regarding its efficiency, it is very likely to be function. The right part is that there are numerous top registry products which work; we simply have to take your pick.
In [[axiomatic set theory]] and the branches of [[logic]], [[mathematics]], [[philosophy]], and [[computer science]] that use it, the '''axiom of infinity''' is one of the [[axiom]]s of [[Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory]].  It guarantees the existence of at least one [[infinite set]], namely a set containing the [[natural number]]s.
 
== Formal statement ==
In the [[formal language]] of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads:
:<math>\exist \mathbf{I} \, ( \empty \in \mathbf{I} \, \and \, \forall x \in \mathbf{I} \, ( \, ( x \cup \{x\} ) \in \mathbf{I} ) ) .</math>
 
In words, [[Existential quantification|there is]] a [[Set (mathematics)|set]] '''I''' (the set which is postulated to be infinite), such that the [[empty set]] is in '''I''' and such that whenever any ''x'' is a member of '''I''', the set formed by taking the [[Axiom of union|union]] of ''x'' with its [[singleton (mathematics)|singleton]] {''x''} is also a member of '''I'''. Such a set is sometimes called an '''inductive set'''.
 
== Interpretation and consequences ==
 
This axiom is closely related to the [[Natural number#A standard construction|standard construction]] of the naturals in set theory, in which the ''[[successor ordinal|successor]]'' of ''x'' is defined as ''x'' ∪ {''x''}. If ''x'' is a set, then it follows from the other axioms of set theory that this successor is also a uniquely defined set. Successors are used to define the usual set-theoretic encoding of the [[natural number]]s.  In this encoding, zero is the empty set:
 
:0 = {}.
 
The number 1 is the successor of 0:
 
:1 = 0 ∪ {0} = {} ∪ {0} = {0}.
 
Likewise, 2 is the successor of 1:
 
:2 = 1 ∪ {1} = {0} ∪ {1} = {0,1},
 
and so on. A consequence of this definition is that every natural number is equal to the set of all preceding natural numbers.
 
This construction forms the natural numbers. However, the other axioms are insufficient to prove the existence of the set of all natural numbers. Therefore its existence is taken as an axiom&mdash;the axiom of infinity. This axiom asserts that there is a set '''I''' that contains 0 and is [[Closure (mathematics)|closed]] under the operation of taking the successor; that is, for each element of '''I''', the successor of that element is also in '''I'''.
 
Thus the essence of the axiom is:
 
:There is a set, '''I''', that includes all the natural numbers.
 
The axiom of infinity is also one of the [[von Neumann–Bernays–Gödel axioms]].
 
== Extracting the natural numbers from the infinite set ==
The infinite set '''I''' is a superset of the natural numbers. To show that the natural numbers themselves constitute a set, the [[axiom schema of specification]] can be applied to remove unwanted elements, leaving the set '''N''' of all natural numbers. This set is unique by the [[axiom of extensionality]].
 
To extract the natural numbers, we need a definition of which sets are natural numbers. The natural numbers can be defined in a way which does not assume any axioms except the [[axiom of extensionality]] and the [[epsilon-induction|axiom of induction]]&mdash;a natural number is either zero or a successor and each of its elements is either zero or a successor of another of its elements. In formal language, the definition says:
 
:<math>\forall n (n \in \mathbf{N} \iff ([n = \empty \,\,\or\,\, \exist k ( n = k \cup \{k\} )] \,\,\and\,\, \forall m \in n[m = \empty \,\,\or\,\, \exist k \in n ( m = k \cup \{k\} )])).</math>
 
Or, even more formally:
 
:<math>\forall n (n \in \mathbf{N} \iff ([\forall k \in n(\bot) \or \exist k \in n( \forall j \in k(j \in n) \and \forall j \in n(j=k \lor j \in k))] \and</math>
::<math>\forall m \in n[\forall k \in m(\bot) \or \exist k \in n(k \in m \and \forall j \in k(j \in m) \and \forall j \in m(j=k \lor j \in k))])).</math>
 
Here, <math>\bot</math> denotes the [[logical constant]] "false", so <math>\forall k \in n(\bot)</math> is a formula that holds only if ''n'' is the empty set.
 
=== Alternative method ===
An alternative method is the following.  Let <math>\Phi(x)</math> be the formula that says `x is inductive'; i.e. <math>\Phi(x) = (\varnothing \in x \wedge \forall y(y \in x \to (y \cup \{y\} \in x)))</math>.  Informally, what we will do is take the intersection of all inductive sets. More formally, we wish to prove the existence of a unique set <math>W</math> such that
 
:<math>\forall x(x \in W \leftrightarrow \forall I(\Phi(I) \to x \in I)).</math>  (*)
 
For existence, we will use the Axiom of Infinity combined with the [[Axiom schema of specification]].  Let <math>I</math> be an inductive set guaranteed by the Axiom of Infinity. Then we use the Axiom Schema of Specification to define our set <math>W = \{x \in I:\forall J(\Phi(J) \to x \in J)\}</math> - i.e. <math>W</math> is the set of all elements of <math>I</math> which happen also to be elements of every other inductive set. This clearly satisfies the hypothesis of (*), since if <math>x \in W</math>, then <math>x</math> is in every inductive set, and if <math>x</math> is in every inductive set, it is in particular in <math>I</math>, so it must also be in <math>W</math>.
 
For uniqueness, first note that any set which satisfies (*) is itself inductive, since 0 is in all inductive sets, and if an element <math>x</math> is in all inductive sets, then by the inductive property so is its successor. Thus if there were another set <math>W'</math> which satisfied (*) we would have that <math>W' \subseteq W</math> since <math>W</math> is inductive, and <math>W \subseteq W'</math> since <math>W'</math> is inductive.  Thus <math>W = W'</math>.  Let <math>\omega</math> denote this unique element.
 
This definition is convenient because the [[Mathematical induction|principle of induction]] immediately follows:  If <math>I \subseteq \omega</math> is inductive, then also <math>\omega \subseteq I</math>, so that <math>I = \omega</math>.
 
Both these methods produce systems which satisfy the axioms of [[second-order arithmetic]], since the [[axiom of power set]] allows us to quantify over the [[power set]] of <math>\omega</math>, as in [[second-order logic]].  Thus they both completely determine [[Isomorphism|isomorphic]] systems, and since they are isomorphic under the [[Identity function|identity map]], they must in fact be [[Equality (mathematics)|equal]].
 
== Independence ==
The axiom of infinity cannot be derived from the rest of the axioms of ZFC, if these other axioms are consistent. Nor can it be refuted, if all of ZFC is consistent.
 
Indeed, using the [[Von Neumann universe]], we can make a model of the axioms where the axiom of infinity is replaced by its negation. It is <math>V_\omega \!</math>, the class of [[hereditarily finite set]]s, with the inherited element relation.
 
The cardinality of the set of natural numbers, [[aleph null]] (<math>\aleph_0</math>), has many of the properties of a [[Large cardinal axiom|large cardinal]]. Thus the axiom of infinity is sometimes regarded as the first ''large cardinal axiom'', and conversely large cardinal axioms are sometimes called stronger axioms of infinity.
 
== See also ==
* [[Peano axioms]]
* [[Finitism]]
 
== References ==
* [[Paul Halmos]] (1960) ''Naive Set Theory''. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company. Reprinted 1974 by Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-90092-6.
* [[Thomas Jech]] (2003) ''Set Theory: The Third Millennium Edition, Revised and Expanded''. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-44085-2.
* [[Kenneth Kunen]] (1980) ''Set Theory: An Introduction to Independence Proofs''. Elsevier. ISBN 0-444-86839-9.
* {{cite book | last1= Hrbacek | first1 = Karel | last2=Jech | first2=Thomas | authorlink2= Thomas Jech | title = Introduction to Set Theory| edition = 3 | year = 1999 | isbn = 0-8247-7915-0 | publisher=Marcel Dekker}}
 
{{Infinity}}
{{Set theory}}
 
[[Category:Axioms of set theory]]

Revision as of 17:13, 31 January 2014

In axiomatic set theory and the branches of logic, mathematics, philosophy, and computer science that use it, the axiom of infinity is one of the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory. It guarantees the existence of at least one infinite set, namely a set containing the natural numbers.

Formal statement

In the formal language of the Zermelo–Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads:

I(IxI((x{x})I)).

In words, there is a set I (the set which is postulated to be infinite), such that the empty set is in I and such that whenever any x is a member of I, the set formed by taking the union of x with its singleton {x} is also a member of I. Such a set is sometimes called an inductive set.

Interpretation and consequences

This axiom is closely related to the standard construction of the naturals in set theory, in which the successor of x is defined as x ∪ {x}. If x is a set, then it follows from the other axioms of set theory that this successor is also a uniquely defined set. Successors are used to define the usual set-theoretic encoding of the natural numbers. In this encoding, zero is the empty set:

0 = {}.

The number 1 is the successor of 0:

1 = 0 ∪ {0} = {} ∪ {0} = {0}.

Likewise, 2 is the successor of 1:

2 = 1 ∪ {1} = {0} ∪ {1} = {0,1},

and so on. A consequence of this definition is that every natural number is equal to the set of all preceding natural numbers.

This construction forms the natural numbers. However, the other axioms are insufficient to prove the existence of the set of all natural numbers. Therefore its existence is taken as an axiom—the axiom of infinity. This axiom asserts that there is a set I that contains 0 and is closed under the operation of taking the successor; that is, for each element of I, the successor of that element is also in I.

Thus the essence of the axiom is:

There is a set, I, that includes all the natural numbers.

The axiom of infinity is also one of the von Neumann–Bernays–Gödel axioms.

Extracting the natural numbers from the infinite set

The infinite set I is a superset of the natural numbers. To show that the natural numbers themselves constitute a set, the axiom schema of specification can be applied to remove unwanted elements, leaving the set N of all natural numbers. This set is unique by the axiom of extensionality.

To extract the natural numbers, we need a definition of which sets are natural numbers. The natural numbers can be defined in a way which does not assume any axioms except the axiom of extensionality and the axiom of induction—a natural number is either zero or a successor and each of its elements is either zero or a successor of another of its elements. In formal language, the definition says:

n(nN([n=k(n=k{k})]mn[m=kn(m=k{k})])).

Or, even more formally:

n(nN([kn()kn(jk(jn)jn(j=kjk))]
mn[km()kn(kmjk(jm)jm(j=kjk))])).

Here, denotes the logical constant "false", so kn() is a formula that holds only if n is the empty set.

Alternative method

An alternative method is the following. Let Φ(x) be the formula that says `x is inductive'; i.e. Φ(x)=(xy(yx(y{y}x))). Informally, what we will do is take the intersection of all inductive sets. More formally, we wish to prove the existence of a unique set W such that

x(xWI(Φ(I)xI)). (*)

For existence, we will use the Axiom of Infinity combined with the Axiom schema of specification. Let I be an inductive set guaranteed by the Axiom of Infinity. Then we use the Axiom Schema of Specification to define our set W={xI:J(Φ(J)xJ)} - i.e. W is the set of all elements of I which happen also to be elements of every other inductive set. This clearly satisfies the hypothesis of (*), since if xW, then x is in every inductive set, and if x is in every inductive set, it is in particular in I, so it must also be in W.

For uniqueness, first note that any set which satisfies (*) is itself inductive, since 0 is in all inductive sets, and if an element x is in all inductive sets, then by the inductive property so is its successor. Thus if there were another set W which satisfied (*) we would have that WW since W is inductive, and WW since W is inductive. Thus W=W. Let ω denote this unique element.

This definition is convenient because the principle of induction immediately follows: If Iω is inductive, then also ωI, so that I=ω.

Both these methods produce systems which satisfy the axioms of second-order arithmetic, since the axiom of power set allows us to quantify over the power set of ω, as in second-order logic. Thus they both completely determine isomorphic systems, and since they are isomorphic under the identity map, they must in fact be equal.

Independence

The axiom of infinity cannot be derived from the rest of the axioms of ZFC, if these other axioms are consistent. Nor can it be refuted, if all of ZFC is consistent.

Indeed, using the Von Neumann universe, we can make a model of the axioms where the axiom of infinity is replaced by its negation. It is Vω, the class of hereditarily finite sets, with the inherited element relation.

The cardinality of the set of natural numbers, aleph null (0), has many of the properties of a large cardinal. Thus the axiom of infinity is sometimes regarded as the first large cardinal axiom, and conversely large cardinal axioms are sometimes called stronger axioms of infinity.

See also

References

  • Paul Halmos (1960) Naive Set Theory. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company. Reprinted 1974 by Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-90092-6.
  • Thomas Jech (2003) Set Theory: The Third Millennium Edition, Revised and Expanded. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-44085-2.
  • Kenneth Kunen (1980) Set Theory: An Introduction to Independence Proofs. Elsevier. ISBN 0-444-86839-9.
  • 20 year-old Real Estate Agent Rusty from Saint-Paul, has hobbies and interests which includes monopoly, property developers in singapore and poker. Will soon undertake a contiki trip that may include going to the Lower Valley of the Omo.

    My blog: http://www.primaboinca.com/view_profile.php?userid=5889534

Template:Infinity Template:Set theory