MPE Home Metamath Proof Explorer < Previous   Next >
Nearby theorems
Mirrors  >  Home  >  MPE Home  >  Th. List  >  ru Structured version   Unicode version

Theorem ru 3160
Description: Russell's Paradox. Proposition 4.14 of [TakeutiZaring] p. 14.

In the late 1800s, Frege's Axiom of (unrestricted) Comprehension, expressed in our notation as 
A  e.  _V, asserted that any collection of sets  A is a set i.e. belongs to the universe 
_V of all sets. In particular, by substituting  { x  |  x  e/  x } (the "Russell class") for  A, it asserted  { x  |  x  e/  x }  e.  _V, meaning that the "collection of all sets which are not members of themselves" is a set. However, here we prove  { x  |  x  e/  x }  e/  _V. This contradiction was discovered by Russell in 1901 (published in 1903), invalidating the Comprehension Axiom and leading to the collapse of Frege's system.

In 1908, Zermelo rectified this fatal flaw by replacing Comprehension with a weaker Subset (or Separation) Axiom ssex 4347 asserting that  A is a set only when it is smaller than some other set  B. However, Zermelo was then faced with a "chicken and egg" problem of how to show  B is a set, leading him to introduce the set-building axioms of Null Set 0ex 4339, Pairing prex 4406, Union uniex 4705, Power Set pwex 4382, and Infinity omex 7598 to give him some starting sets to work with (all of which, before Russell's Paradox, were immediate consequences of Frege's Comprehension). In 1922 Fraenkel strengthened the Subset Axiom with our present Replacement Axiom funimaex 5531 (whose modern formalization is due to Skolem, also in 1922). Thus, in a very real sense Russell's Paradox spawned the invention of ZF set theory and completely revised the foundations of mathematics!

Another mainstream formalization of set theory, devised by von Neumann, Bernays, and Goedel, uses class variables rather than set variables as its primitives. The axiom system NBG in [Mendelson] p. 225 is suitable for a Metamath encoding. NBG is a conservative extension of ZF in that it proves exactly the same theorems as ZF that are expressible in the language of ZF. An advantage of NBG is that it is finitely axiomatizable - the Axiom of Replacement can be broken down into a finite set of formulas that eliminate its wff metavariable. Finite axiomatizability is required by some proof languages (although not by Metamath). There is a stronger version of NBG called Morse-Kelley (axiom system MK in [Mendelson] p. 287).

Russell himself continued in a different direction, avoiding the paradox with his "theory of types." Quine extended Russell's ideas to formulate his New Foundations set theory (axiom system NF of [Quine] p. 331). In NF, the collection of all sets is a set, contradicting ZF and NBG set theories, and it has other bizarre consequences: when sets become too huge (beyond the size of those used in standard mathematics), the Axiom of Choice ac4 8355 and Cantor's Theorem canth 6539 are provably false! (See ncanth 6540 for some intuition behind the latter.) Recent results (as of 2014) seem to show that NF is equiconsistent to Z (ZF in which ax-sep 4330 replaces ax-rep 4320) with ax-sep 4330 restricted to only bounded quantifiers. NF is finitely axiomatizable and can be encoded in Metamath using the axioms from T. Hailperin, "A set of axioms for logic," J. Symb. Logic 9:1-19 (1944).

Under our ZF set theory, every set is a member of the Russell class by elirrv 7565 (derived from the Axiom of Regularity), so for us the Russell class equals the universe 
_V (theorem ruv 7568). See ruALT 7569 for an alternate proof of ru 3160 derived from that fact. (Contributed by NM, 7-Aug-1994.)

Assertion
Ref Expression
ru  |-  { x  |  x  e/  x }  e/  _V

Proof of Theorem ru
Dummy variable  y is distinct from all other variables.
StepHypRef Expression
1 pm5.19 350 . . . . . 6  |-  -.  (
y  e.  y  <->  -.  y  e.  y )
2 eleq1 2496 . . . . . . . 8  |-  ( x  =  y  ->  (
x  e.  y  <->  y  e.  y ) )
3 df-nel 2602 . . . . . . . . 9  |-  ( x  e/  x  <->  -.  x  e.  x )
4 id 20 . . . . . . . . . . 11  |-  ( x  =  y  ->  x  =  y )
54, 4eleq12d 2504 . . . . . . . . . 10  |-  ( x  =  y  ->  (
x  e.  x  <->  y  e.  y ) )
65notbid 286 . . . . . . . . 9  |-  ( x  =  y  ->  ( -.  x  e.  x  <->  -.  y  e.  y ) )
73, 6syl5bb 249 . . . . . . . 8  |-  ( x  =  y  ->  (
x  e/  x  <->  -.  y  e.  y ) )
82, 7bibi12d 313 . . . . . . 7  |-  ( x  =  y  ->  (
( x  e.  y  <-> 
x  e/  x )  <->  ( y  e.  y  <->  -.  y  e.  y ) ) )
98spv 1965 . . . . . 6  |-  ( A. x ( x  e.  y  <->  x  e/  x
)  ->  ( y  e.  y  <->  -.  y  e.  y ) )
101, 9mto 169 . . . . 5  |-  -.  A. x ( x  e.  y  <->  x  e/  x
)
11 abeq2 2541 . . . . 5  |-  ( y  =  { x  |  x  e/  x }  <->  A. x ( x  e.  y  <->  x  e/  x
) )
1210, 11mtbir 291 . . . 4  |-  -.  y  =  { x  |  x  e/  x }
1312nex 1564 . . 3  |-  -.  E. y  y  =  {
x  |  x  e/  x }
14 isset 2960 . . 3  |-  ( { x  |  x  e/  x }  e.  _V  <->  E. y  y  =  {
x  |  x  e/  x } )
1513, 14mtbir 291 . 2  |-  -.  {
x  |  x  e/  x }  e.  _V
1615nelir 2698 1  |-  { x  |  x  e/  x }  e/  _V
Colors of variables: wff set class
Syntax hints:   -. wn 3    <-> wb 177   A.wal 1549   E.wex 1550    = wceq 1652    e. wcel 1725   {cab 2422    e/ wnel 2600   _Vcvv 2956
This theorem was proved from axioms:  ax-1 5  ax-2 6  ax-3 7  ax-mp 8  ax-gen 1555  ax-5 1566  ax-17 1626  ax-9 1666  ax-8 1687  ax-6 1744  ax-7 1749  ax-11 1761  ax-12 1950  ax-ext 2417
This theorem depends on definitions:  df-bi 178  df-an 361  df-tru 1328  df-ex 1551  df-nf 1554  df-sb 1659  df-clab 2423  df-cleq 2429  df-clel 2432  df-nel 2602  df-v 2958
  Copyright terms: Public domain W3C validator