Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

For any sets $x$, $y$ we write $\langle x,y \rangle$ for the set $\{\{x\},\{x,y\}\}$ Show that this set is unique.

My proof:

By axiom ZF3 of pairs there exists a set (I call it $z:=\langle x,y \rangle$) whose elements are $x$ and $y$. If now $z^{\prime}$ is another such set, then any element of $z^{\prime}$ $x$ or $y$ is also an element of $z$ and vice versa and by the ZF1 (extensionality) axiom we must have that $z=z^{\prime}$.

Am I correct?

share|improve this question
    
In your construction, what makes your set ordered? In particular, what is the difference between $\langle x,y \rangle$ and $\langle y,x \rangle$? –  A Walker May 14 '13 at 17:16
    
$<x,y>=\{\{x\},\{x,y\}\}$ but $<y,x>=\{\{y\},\{y,x\}\}$ I guess –  Heidi.E May 14 '13 at 17:26
    
What is meant by unique in this context? Since this is the usual set-theoretic definition of an ordered pair it is more common to prove that the following holds: If $\langle x , y \rangle = \langle u , v \rangle$, then $x = u$ and $y = v$. –  Arthur Fischer May 14 '13 at 19:27

1 Answer 1

Formally one can write $$\forall z(z\in<x,y>\leftrightarrow (z=\{x\}\lor z=\{x,y\}))$$ (and also the statements $z=\{x\}$ and $z=\{x,y\}$ can be properly expressed as sentences in the language of ZF). Now, if $w$ is another set such that $$\forall z(z\in w\leftrightarrow (z=\{x\}\lor z=\{x,y\})),$$ then obviously the two sets ($w$ and $<x, y>$) are equal by the axiom of extensionality. (I assumed so far you already know (how to prove) that there exists a set whose elements are exactly $\{x\}$ and $\{x,y\}$, given sets $x$ and $y$. If not, it is easy to show that this existence is ensured by the axiom of pair and the separation schema).

I hope this answers your question (I'm not pretty sure I actually understood what you were asking for).

share|improve this answer
    
the qestion was to show that the set defined above is unique –  Heidi.E May 14 '13 at 18:00
1  
Then my answer should work... –  Marco Vergura May 14 '13 at 19:18

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.