I'm searching for a book or an article that proves that if a statement can be proved in Constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory then the statement can be proved in Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (for example, I'm searching for a proof of the fact that every axiom of Constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory can be proved in Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory).
2026-03-28 10:56:21.1774695381
Constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory is contained in Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory
92 Views Asked by user85362 https://math.techqa.club/user/user85362/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in LOGIC
- Theorems in MK would imply theorems in ZFC
- What is (mathematically) minimal computer architecture to run any software
- What formula proved in MK or Godel Incompleteness theorem
- Determine the truth value and validity of the propositions given
- Is this a commonly known paradox?
- Help with Propositional Logic Proof
- Symbol for assignment of a truth-value?
- Find the truth value of... empty set?
- Do I need the axiom of choice to prove this statement?
- Prove that any truth function $f$ can be represented by a formula $φ$ in cnf by negating a formula in dnf
Related Questions in REFERENCE-REQUEST
- Best book to study Lie group theory
- Alternative definition for characteristic foliation of a surface
- Transition from theory of PDEs to applied analysis and industrial problems and models with PDEs
- Random variables in integrals, how to analyze?
- Abstract Algebra Preparation
- Definition of matrix valued smooth function
- CLT for Martingales
- Almost locality of cubic spline interpolation
- Identify sequences from OEIS or the literature, or find examples of odd integers $n\geq 1$ satisfying these equations related to odd perfect numbers
- property of Lebesgue measure involving small intervals
Related Questions in SET-THEORY
- Theorems in MK would imply theorems in ZFC
- What formula proved in MK or Godel Incompleteness theorem
- Proving the schema of separation from replacement
- Understanding the Axiom of Replacement
- Ordinals and cardinals in ETCS set axiomatic
- Minimal model over forcing iteration
- How can I prove that the collection of all (class-)function from a proper class A to a class B is empty?
- max of limit cardinals smaller than a successor cardinal bigger than $\aleph_\omega$
- Canonical choice of many elements not contained in a set
- Non-standard axioms + ZF and rest of math
Related Questions in CONSTRUCTIVE-MATHEMATICS
- How do set theories base on Intuitionistic Logic deal with ordinals?
- Constructive Proof- How to Start?
- Does Diaconescu's theorem imply cubical type theory is non-constructive?
- Attempt at constructive proof of compactness of [0,1], does this use LEM? Does a constructive proof exist?
- Constructive proof of existence of maximal ideal
- Is there a theorem that can easily be proved to be non intuitionistic?
- What kinds of variables range over proofs?
- Construct a real $x$ such that ZF does not prove whether $x\in\mathbb{Q}$
- Infinitesimal Approaches To Differential Geometry As Conservative Extension
- Confusion around quantifiers in intuitionistic logic
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Proving this is fairly straightforward. We follow this article’s definition.
Clearly, axioms 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7’, and 8 are all axioms of ZF. We need to prove axiom 6’, 7’’, 8, and 9.
For 6’, note that every instance of 6’ is an instance of 6. So every axiom in 6’ (bounded separation) is already an axiom of ZF, since it is an instance of the axiom scheme of separation.
For 7’’ (strong collection), we use Scott’s Trick. Suppose $\forall x \in A \exists y \phi(x, y)$. Then for each $x \in A$, let $\alpha_x$ be the least ordinal such that $\exists y \in V_{\alpha_x} \phi(x, y)$. Then take $C = \bigcup\limits_{x \in A} V_{\alpha_x}$. And take $B = \{y \in C \mid \exists x \in A \phi(x, y)\}$. This is the $B$ that axiom 7’’ asserts.
For 8’, we take the form asserted in the article, $\forall A \forall B \exists C (C$ is full from $A$ to $B)$. This follows directly from the existence of power sets: let $C = \{R \in P(A \times B) \mid R$ is total$\}$.
For 9, suppose $\forall y (\forall a \in y \phi(a) \to \phi(y))$. Now suppose for sake of contradiction that there is some $x$ such that $\neg \phi(x)$. Let $T$ be the transitive closure of $\{x\}$, and let $U = \{u \in T \mid \neg \phi(u)\}$. By the axiom of regularity, take a $\in$-minimal element $w$ of $U$. Then for all $a \in w$, $a \notin U$ and thus $\phi(a)$. Therefore, $\phi(w)$. This contradicts $u \in U$.