Inconsistency of ℕ with the set union operation

Abstract

A contradiction is obtained, considering the axiom of infinity, then ℕ and Peano axioms, together a list of ℕ subsets and with inclusion relation and union operation. Natural numbers constitute an infinite set, ℕ, but we show the union of its proper subsets, with a specific form, isn’t an infinite set. Also we get a simpler explanation and a symbolic representation. Lastly, inconsistency of Peano successor axiom is a consequence of rejecting infinity.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Inconcistency of ℕ from a not-finitist point of view.Enrico Pier Giorgio Cadeddu - 2023 - International Journal of Modern Research in Engineering and Technology 8 (10):2.
On Interpretations of Arithmetic and Set Theory.Richard Kaye & Tin Lok Wong - 2007 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 48 (4):497-510.
Gödel mathematics versus Hilbert mathematics. I. The Gödel incompleteness (1931) statement: axiom or theorem?Vasil Penchev - 2022 - Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics eJournal (Elsevier: SSRN) 14 (9):1-56.
The strength of extensionality I—weak weak set theories with infinity.Kentaro Sato - 2009 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 157 (2-3):234-268.
On the relative strengths of fragments of collection.Zachiri McKenzie - 2019 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 65 (1):80-94.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-01-23

Downloads
227 (#112,697)

6 months
108 (#52,378)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references