Re: is there a set of all ordinals

you wrote
"n Z set theories, there is no set S such that every ordinal is a
member of S.

In ordinary class theories, there is no set S such that every ordinal
is a member of S, but there is a proper class C such that every
ordinal is a member of C"

i am not talking about what set theories or ordinary class theories allow
i am talking about
is there a set of all ordinals
obviously such a set was accepted in Burali-fortis day as they came up
with the paradox
did canto accept such a set
which since set theory has now been denied only by introducing an axiom

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutscience.com/group/sci.logic/
More information at http://www.talkaboutscience.com/faq.html

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Zh-iterative set Theory.
    ... Ascending membership chain that should end by a member of x, ... x is within the transitive closure of y, ... all non emtpy ordinals is not in Vi. ... Axiom schema of Comprehension: For every n, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Zh-iterative set Theory.
    ... Ascending membership chain that should end by a member of x, ... which can be understood in this theory as the following schema. ... all non emtpy ordinals is not in Vi. ... Axiom schema of Comprehension: For every n, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Zh-iterative set Theory.
    ... Axiom of Transitive closure: ... Now every member k of y1 that is not a member of x should have an ... Since the set of all ordinals in Vi is proved in this theory to exist ... finite ordinals only exist in x and by definition all of them exist in ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Small Set theory:Revised.
    ... P((y is a subset of Power y and every member m of y is a subset ... since otherwise it will be in itself and thus violates axiom 2. ... and accordingly all ordinals would be finite, and N would be the set of ... In zuhair set theory, the Axiom Of Choice is probably not needed. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cardinality: a definition
    ... since I call this entity the Heap of all ordinals). ... But with the axiom ... No member of t' is bijectable with x, ... In another thread awhile ago, I gave you a proof that it is not a set. ...
    (sci.math)