Set Theory - Blog Posts

Here's another weird model of ZFC relating to the axiom of regularity that fucked me up when I learned about it. The axiom of regularity implies that there can be no set {x_n | n ∈ ω} such that x_{n+1} ∈ x_n for each n ∈ ω.

Let's construct our model. Add to the language of ZFC countably infinitely many constants c_0, c_1, c_2, ... and let Γ be the set of sentences Γ = {c_{n+1} ∈ c_n | n ∈ ω}. We will use the compactness theorem to show that there is a model of ZFC ∪ Γ.

Let Δ be a finite subset of Γ and Let J be any model of ZFC. Since Δ is finite, there is a maximum k such that the sentence c_k ∈ c_{k-1} is in Γ. Add to J the definitions, for each n ≤ k, c_nJ = k - n, and for each n > k, set c_nJ = 0. Then for all 1 < n ≤ k, c_n = k-n ∈ k-n+1 = c_{n-1}, and so J is a model of ZFC ∪ Δ.

Thus, by the compactness theorem, there exists a model of ZFC ∪ Γ.

This is very surprising, and at first glance seems to contradict the axiom of regularity! But what it really means is that the sets x_n from the first paragraph can exist, but they cannot be gathered together in a set.

downward lowenheim-skolem is so fucked up to me. what do you *mean* there's a countable model of first-order set theory