Is the Axiom of Union independent of the rest of ZF? - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-06-20T01:54:18Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/81815http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/81815/is-the-axiom-of-union-independent-of-the-rest-of-zfIs the Axiom of Union independent of the rest of ZF?Tct2011-11-24T15:52:50Z2011-11-24T23:08:11Z
<p>Short version: Is the axiom of union independent of the rest of axioms of ZF?</p>
<p>NO) <a href="http://books.google.es/books?id=zwv0RgAACAAJ&dq=tourlakis+set+vol+2&hl=es&ei=vWbOTu6YHYmb8QP8-MzODw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA" rel="nofollow">Tourlakis (2003)</a> says in p. 177 that the axiom of union can be derived from the rest of ZF if an appropriate version of collection axiom[*] is chosen. The quote is:</p>
<p>«Bourbaki (1966b) adopts the axiom of pairing, but adopts collection version (2), and proves both separation and union»</p>
<p>YES) In the other hand, I have read <a href="http://mathoverflow.net/questions/48365/minimal-subset-of-axioms-for-zfc/54328#54328" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://tiddlyspace.com/bags/oxkunengroup_public/tiddlers/4.7%3A%2520Models%2520for%2520ZFC-Replacement%2520and%2520ZFC-Unions" rel="nofollow">here</a> something like "$H_{\kappa}$ is a model for ZF-Union+¬Union", where $\kappa$ was $\beth_\omega$ or a singular cardinal.</p>
<p>Any reference on the subject would be highly appreciated. I apologize in advance if the question is too basic (not a mathematician!). Also, I have googled it and followed some false trails before asking here. Thanks.</p>
<p>[*] The appropriate version of collection is apparently weaker (or equivalent at most) than the collection axiom that he is adopting in his text. I think the statement is:</p>
<p>$(∀x)(∃z)(∀y)({\mathcal P} [x, y] → y ∈ z) → (\forall A)(\exists B)(\forall y)(y\in B\leftrightarrow (\exists x\in A){\mathcal P}[x,y])$</p>
<p>I have translated the notation from III.8.12 and III.2 (obviating any reference to ur-elements).</p>
<p>EDIT: Thank you very much for the answers, they were really helpful.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/81815/is-the-axiom-of-union-independent-of-the-rest-of-zf/81828#81828Answer by Kaveh for Is the Axiom of Union independent of the rest of ZF?Kaveh2011-11-24T18:26:00Z2011-11-24T19:37:40Z<p>The axiom is</p>
<p>$$\forall x \ \exists y \ \forall z \ (\varphi(z,x) \to z\in y) \to \forall X \ \exists Y \ \forall y \ (y \in Y \leftrightarrow \exists x\in X \ \varphi(y,x)) $$</p>
<p>Consider</p>
<p>$$\forall x \ \exists y \ \forall z \ (z\in x \to z\in y) \to \forall X \ \exists Y \ \forall y \ (y \in Y \leftrightarrow \exists x\in X \ y\in x ) $$</p>
<p>This is an instance of the axiom. Now the left side is true (take $y=x$). The right side expresses the existence of the union of $X$.</p>
<hr>
<p>The other version of the axiom:</p>
<p>$$\forall x\in X \ \exists y \ \varphi(x,y) \to \ \exists Y \ \forall x\in X \ \exists y\in Y \ \varphi(x,y)$$</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/81815/is-the-axiom-of-union-independent-of-the-rest-of-zf/81831#81831Answer by Andreas Blass for Is the Axiom of Union independent of the rest of ZF?Andreas Blass2011-11-24T19:33:28Z2011-11-24T19:46:53Z<p>The usual version of collection is the second one in Kaveh's answer. It, with the remaining axioms, won't give the axiom of union. A counterexample is given in the question, except for a slightly unusual definition of <code>$H_\kappa$</code> for singular $\kappa$; it should be the collection of those sets $x$ such that each member of the transitive closure $TC({x})$ has cardinality $<\kappa$. (This does not imply that the whole $TC({x})$ has cardinality $<\kappa$, which is the usual meaning of <code>$H_\kappa$</code>.)</p>
<p>The "appropriate version" of collection used by Bourbaki seems appropriate mainly in the sense that the axiom of union has been built in.</p>