Re: Cantor Confusion

In article <456DC03A.1000206@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Eckard Blumschein <blumschein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 11/29/2006 5:24 PM, mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
We have to accept thart there are sets which are capable of
growing, as Fraenkel et al. expess it.

While there are several books by Fraenkel:

Einleitung in die Mengenlehre 2nd ed. 1923, 3rd ed. 1946,
Gesammelte Abhandlungen Cantor, Dedekind 1932
Das Leben Georg Cantors 1932
Abstract set theory 1961
Lebenskreise - Aus den Erinnerungen eines jüdischen Mathematikers 1967

perhaps there is only one book by Fraenkel et al.:
Foundations of Set Theory 1958. Correct?

Then we have finite sets without
a largest element.

Why not with a growing largest element?

Regards,
Eckard

Growing elements would allow claims like:
"2 + 2 = 5 for large enough values of 2".
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cantor Confusion
    ... While there are several books by Fraenkel: ... Gesammelte Abhandlungen Cantor, Dedekind 1932 ... Foundations of Set Theory 1958. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantor Confusion
    ... While there are several books by Fraenkel: ... Gesammelte Abhandlungen Cantor, Dedekind 1932 ... Foundations of Set Theory 1958. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
    ... The set of ordered pairs of a function is a subset of many Cartesian ... Cartesian product you're using for this definition is domXrange, ... definitions in basic math books. ... We're talking about set theory as to a standard definition, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
    ... You do claim something about what most set theory books say and mean. ... And I am not going to argue over the meaning of 'standard'. ... And I did NOT claim as to what most math books say or mean - and THAT ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
    ... JUST said I am incorrect EVEN IN SET THEORY. ... than yours that is easily found even in books other than on set theory ... The natural interpretation is that a function is a triple and "f" is ... reluctance, even gave you the quotes, but you still didn't even adress ...
    (sci.math)