Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T10:41:39.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Permutations and wellfoundedness: the true meaning of the bizarre arithmetic of Quine's NF

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Thomas Forster
Thomas Forster*
Affiliation:
Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics, Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge, Cb3 0Wb, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is shown that, according to NF, many of the assertions of ordinal arithmetic involving the T-function which is peculiar to NF turn out to be equivalent to the truth-in-certain-permutation-models of assertions which have perfectly sensible ZF-style meanings, such as: the existence of wellfounded sets of great size or rank, or the nonexistence of small counterexamples to the wellfoundedness of ∈. Everything here holds also for NFU if the permutations are taken to fix all urelemente.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 71 , Issue 1 , March 2006 , pp. 227 - 240
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Boffa, Maurice and Pétry, André, On self-membered sets in Quine's set theory NF, Logique et Analyse, vol. 141–142 (1993), pp. 59–60.Google Scholar
[2]Forster, Thomas, Set theory with universal set: exploring an untyped universe, second ed.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Forster, Thomas, Church-Oswald models for set theory, Logic, meaning and computation: essays in memory of Alonzo Church, Synthese library, vol. 305, Kluwer, Dordrecht, Boston and London, 2001, (revised edition, sans missprints, available on www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~tf/churchlatest.ps).Google Scholar
[4]Jech, Thomas, On hereditarily countable sets, this Journal, vol. 47 (1982), pp. 43–47.Google Scholar
[5]Körner, Friederike, Cofinal indiscernibles and some applications to new foundations, Mathematical Logic Quarterly, vol. 40 (1994), pp. 347–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Scott, Dana, Quine's individuals, Logic, methodology and philosophy of science (E. Nagel, editor), Stanford University Press, 1962, pp. 111–115.Google Scholar