Results 1 to 7 of 7
Like Tree4Thanks
  • 2 Post By Shakarri
  • 1 Post By Shakarri
  • 1 Post By zzephod

Math Help - Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

  1. #1
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    887
    Thanks
    91

    Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

    This addresses the “proof” of Cantor’s paradox in Suppes (Axiomatic Set Theory), pg 5.

    Let S1 be the set of all sets EXCEPT S1 with cardinality n.
    Let S2 be the set of all subsets of S1 EXCEPT S2 with cardinality p.

    Then every member of S1 is a member of S2 and every member of S2 is a member of S1. Therefore n=p and Cantors “paradox” is not a paradox.

    In all fairness to Suppes, he made the mistake of using intelligible language.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Super Member
    Joined
    Oct 2012
    From
    Ireland
    Posts
    507
    Thanks
    138

    Re: Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

    I am confused, is n the cardinality of every set in S1 or is n the cardinality of S1? I read it as the first meaning but it looks like you interpreted it as the second.

    Not every member of S2 is a member of S1.
    Suppose S1={T1,T2}
    The the subsets of S1 are {T1}, {T2}, {T1,T2}, {} where {} is the empty set.
    {T1,T2} is not a member of S1 and nor is {}
    Thanks from topsquark and SworD
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    887
    Thanks
    91

    Re: Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

    n and p are clearly defined.

    Your premise is incorrect. As stated previously:
    Let S1 be the set of ALL sets EXCEPT S1 with cardinality n.
    Let S2 be the set of ALL subsets of S1 EXCEPT S2 with cardinality p.

    If x is a member of S1 it is a subset of S1 and hence is a member of S2.
    If x is a menber of S2 it is a member of S1 because S1 contains all sets (except S1)
    Therefore S1=S2 and n=p.



    S1
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Super Member
    Joined
    Oct 2012
    From
    Ireland
    Posts
    507
    Thanks
    138

    Re: Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

    Quote Originally Posted by Hartlw View Post
    n and p are clearly defined.
    No they are not. Saying so and changing your underlining does not help. I pointed out how the wording of your post was confusing, why don't you just reword it.

    If x is a member of S2 it is a member of S1 because S1 contains all sets (except S1)
    If S1 contains all sets it must be infinite in size. Equating n to p would be equating 2 infinities which is a risky business and can cause paradoxes.
    Thanks from topsquark
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    887
    Thanks
    91

    Re: Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

    I am relying on Suppes, Dover edition.

    "...we consider the cardinal number n of the set of all sets.".... "But we may also consider the set of all subsets of S, and its cardinal number p." pg 7.

    He uses Russels "set of all sets," which of course leads to a paradox. I do not do so so there is no paradox.
    Last edited by Hartlw; September 27th 2013 at 06:20 AM. Reason: added "....."
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Super Member
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    887
    Thanks
    91

    Re: Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

    Shakkari: I suspect Cantor's "paradox" was meant to show that an infinite set doesn't have a cardinality p. He proves this by showing the assumption it does leads to a paradox. All I do is show the assumption it does does not lead to a paradox so the proof is invalid.


    So what is your proof that the set S of all sets except S has no cardinality?
    Last edited by Hartlw; September 27th 2013 at 06:50 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Member
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    From
    Erewhon
    Posts
    159
    Thanks
    104

    Re: Cantors "Paradox" of the greatest cardinal number

    Quote Originally Posted by Hartlw View Post
    Shakkari: I suspect Cantor's "paradox" was meant to show that an infinite set doesn't have a cardinality p. He proves this by showing the assumption it does leads to a paradox. All I do is show the assumption it does does not lead to a paradox so the proof is invalid.


    So what is your proof that the set S of all sets except S has no cardinality?
    Deleted, decided to teach my pig to sing instead.
    .
    Last edited by zzephod; September 29th 2013 at 12:16 AM.
    Thanks from Plato
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Spherical geometry and the "phosphorus pentachloride paradox"
    Posted in the Advanced Applied Math Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 29th 2012, 08:36 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 2nd 2012, 07:06 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: October 17th 2011, 02:50 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 24th 2011, 07:01 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 25th 2010, 04:45 AM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum