I'm looking for references for a set theory which does not include the axiom of powerset but includes axioms allowing taking cartesian product. Please refer me to such if you know about any.
2026-03-25 16:20:41.1774455641
Set Theory without Powerset
139 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
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 ALTERNATIVE-SET-THEORIES
- Set theory without infinite sets
- Question regarding Paraconistent valued models
- Is the second completeness axiom for V really needed for Ackermann set theory to interpret ZF?
- Asking for refs: formalisms that admit {x}={{x}}
- Subtyping of Prop in Coq. Implementation of Ackermann class theory. First-order theories.
- Ackermann set theory appears to prove inaccessible cardinals exist?
- Soft question - recommendations concerning basic topics inside rough set theory
- Principia Mathematica, chapter *117: a false proposition?
- How badly does foundation fail in NF(etc.)?
- Relative consistency of ZF with respect to IZF
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?
Elaborating on the comments:
First of all, even within the classical $\mathsf{ZFC}$-style context, powerset-free theories play an important role. The example I know most about is $\mathsf{KP}$, which basically consists of set theory without choice or powerset, and with separation and replacement dramatically restricted to "simple" formulas. An ordinal $\alpha$ such that $L_\alpha\models\mathsf{KP}$ is called admissible, and admissible ordinals occur not just in set theory but also in computability theory and proof theory. There is also "$\mathsf{ZFC}$ without powerset" (the details of which are more complicated than one might guess); this theory doesn't have the same significance outside set theory that $\mathsf{KP}$ does, but within set theory it too is quite important. Basically, one way we analyze a given "big" set theory is by looking at how "small" pieces of its models behave. Such truncated models are especially interesting when they satisfy a "strong-but-not-too-strong" theory, since then they occur frequently but still have some decent closure properties. Both $\mathsf{KP}$ and $\mathsf{ZFC}^-$ (not to be confused with $\mathsf{ZFC-}$, per the above-linked article) are such a happy-medium theories in the right context, but there are many others.
Outside the classical context there are additional examples but to my knowledge they don't enjoy nearly the same prominence as the $\mathsf{ZFC}$ fragments mentioned above. The SEP article on alternative set theories mentions two, pocket set theory (which Asaf Karagila brought up above) and an alternative due to Vopenka. Each has the property that there is a maximal cardinality. Note that this alone does not negate powerset - consider e.g. $\mathsf{NFU}$ or positive set theories, which in fact have a universal set.