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.

Suppose that $A,B$ are sets. Is $$ \{ y \in B | \exists x \in A: y \in x \} $$ a set? I tried to find a formal proof (replacement? comprehension?) or to show that it doesn't exist (regularity?), but I'm not really familiar with this stuff. Of course it must have to do something with ur-elements or power sets, but I'm to confused now to figure out what is going on.

In the same spirit: If $A$ is a set, is it meaningful to ask whether there exists a set $\Omega$ such that $A=\mathbb{P}(\Omega)$?

[edit]: Hm, what about:If $A$ is a set, is it meaningful to ask whether there exists a set $\Omega$ such that $A\subseteq\mathbb{P}(\Omega)$?

share|improve this question
    
Is a subset of $B$... –  Martín-Blas Pérez Pinilla Feb 13 at 11:17
    
As for your second question: yes it is meaningful to ask but it might not exist –  dani_s Feb 13 at 11:18
    
If $A$ and $B$ are sets, rewriting the condition as $\{ y : y \in B \land \exists x (x \in A \land y \in x) \}$, you must apply Axiom schema of Separation and you will get it. –  Mauro ALLEGRANZA Feb 13 at 11:20
    
How does this give a formula $\phi$ which I can use in the Axiom of Separation? Your formula contains $A,B$? Or am I so confused? –  beginner3115 Feb 13 at 11:58
    
It is a formula $\phi(y)$ with a free variable: so it is ok. And the Axiom needs that you "separate" your new set from an existing one, in order to license you to assert that the condition gives you a set, and this is the $y \in B$ part. –  Mauro ALLEGRANZA Feb 13 at 12:01

1 Answer 1

About the second question. It is meaningful to ask. The answer is obviously false in general.

share|improve this answer

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.