2
$\begingroup$

I have found two different statements on axiom of foundation of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory in two different books as:

1) every nonempty set contains an element that is not an element of any other element in the set.

2) Every non-empty set $x$ contains a member $y$ such that $x$ and $y$ are disjoint sets.

These two are not equivalent statements. Am I correct ?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Which books did you find these formulations in? When written formally with only $\in$ it is easy to misread the axiom. It is also possible that whoever wrote the book made a mistake (which may or may not have been corrected since then). $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Apr 20 '13 at 12:58
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I’ve a suspicion that a $\in$ got turned around in (1). $\endgroup$ – Brian M. Scott Apr 20 '13 at 13:06
5
$\begingroup$

They are not equivalent. In fact, (1) is actually refutable under a weak subtheory of ZF. Consider any inductive set $X$. Then for each $u \in X$ we have that $u \in u \cup \{ u \} \in X$. Thus $X$ has no element as described in (1).

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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