Timeline for Scott-replacement and transitive closure
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2021 at 22:16 | comment | added | Frode Alfson Bjørdal | @ZuhairAl-Johar The construction will work without extensionality as well, if the goal is to achieve a transitive closure. | |
| Sep 20, 2021 at 22:15 | comment | added | Frode Alfson Bjørdal | @ZuhairAl-Johar I hope the following interests you: mathoverflow.net/questions/404362/… | |
| Sep 17, 2021 at 4:29 | comment | added | Frode Alfson Bjørdal | @ZuhairAl-Johar Yes, I was looking for at least one transitive closure for each set. If you may help me state an easy solution, without using the recursion theorem, I would be grateful. | |
| Sep 15, 2021 at 18:04 | comment | added | Zuhair Al-Johar | what do you exactly mean by the transitive closure? As long as Extensionality is lost, there is no quarantee that there is a unique transitive closure for a set, for each set there can be many transitive closures and all of them are of course co-extensional. If you meant to prove existence of a transitive closure for each set, then this is easy, its moreorless the same traditional proof with some modification to follow co-extensionality in replacing from $\omega$ to the $n$-unions instead of identity as usual. | |
| Sep 14, 2021 at 19:57 | history | edited | Frode Alfson Bjørdal | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 33 characters in body
|
| Sep 14, 2021 at 19:27 | history | asked | Frode Alfson Bjørdal | CC BY-SA 4.0 |