Timeline for Is the inclusion version of Kunen inconsistency theorem true?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 8, 2013 at 6:18 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila♦ | Ali, indeed there is a strong similarity in the case of ordinals, and while they do serve as a "spine" for the universe of $\sf ZFC$, they don't quite catch everything. It's the sets of ordinals which do; and for sets of ordinals $\subsetneq$ and $\in$ are two very different relations. | |
| Oct 8, 2013 at 6:10 | comment | added | user36136 | @Asaf & Carlo: You are right. But $\in$ and $\subsetneq$ seem simultaneously similar and different! It just depends on the property which we want to compare them with each other. As I mentioned in the case of ordinal numbers they are in the strongest similarity which is equality! | |
| Oct 8, 2013 at 4:34 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Oct 7, 2013 at 22:44 | comment | added | Rachid Atmai | Indeed Asaf, and the former need not be transitive while the latter always is. | |
| Oct 7, 2013 at 22:35 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 8, 2013 at 23:53 | |||||
| Oct 7, 2013 at 21:30 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila♦ | Note that $\in$ and $\subsetneq$ are very different. The former is well-founded and the latter is not. | |
| Oct 7, 2013 at 21:10 | answer | added | Joel David Hamkins | timeline score: 14 | |
| Oct 7, 2013 at 20:00 | history | asked | user36136 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |