# Tagged Questions

72 views

How is it possible to prove a paradox? Also, can someone explain the Banach-Tarski paradox in layman's terms (for someone up to calc 3 and ODEs knowledge)?
184 views

### Paradoxical models of $\sf ZF$ without choice [closed]

There are some models of $\sf ZF$ without the Axiom of choice, where some paradoxical statements hold that are not possible in $\sf ZFC$ (we do not require that all those statements necessarily hold ...
66 views

### Connectedness of parts used in the Banach–Tarski paradox

A quote from the Wikipedia article "Axiom of choice": One example is the Banach–Tarski paradox which says that it is possible to decompose the 3-dimensional solid unit ball into finitely many ...
136 views

### Understanding: Axiom of Specification and Russell's Paradox: there is no universe?

Following Halmos's Naive Set Theory, Russell's Paradox emerges from using the axiom of specification (that for every set $A$ and property $\phi$ there exists a set $Y$ whose elements are those ...
279 views

Many of you know such paradox... " $\exists y \forall x (x \in y \Longleftrightarrow \Phi(x)$" for any function $\Phi(x)$ substitute $x \notin x$ for $\Phi(x)$ Then by existential instantiation ...
290 views

### Is there a branch of mathematics that requires the existence of sets that contain themselves?

I notice that Russell's paradox, Burali-Forti's paradox, and even Cantor's paradox, all depend on our tolerance of sets that contain themselves (at one level of depth or another). Thus, I was thinking ...
287 views

### Russell Paradox and set theories

The Russell paradox arise in the Cantor set theory, but it can be avoided in the $ZF$ and in $NGB$ axiomatic set theory. Are there other axiomatic set theories in which this paradox can be avoided? ...
346 views

### The class of all classes not containing themselves

In ZF classes are used informally to resolve Russells Paradox, that is the collection of all sets that do not contain themselves does not form a set but a proper class. But doesn't the same paradox ...