WEEK 4
M: Proof of Proposition 1.33. Discussion of consequences.
Consequences: If (A,R) is a set well-ordering
and (B,S) is a proper class set-like well-ordering then
(A,R) is isomorphis to an
initial segment of (B,S)
If both (B,S) and (B',S') are
proper class set-like well-orderings then they are isomorphic.
W: Extensional relations. Mostowski Collapsing theorem. Ordinals.
Consequence: If (A,R) is a set-like well-ordering
then (A,R) is not isomorphic to any of its proper initial segments.
1.34. Definition. Extensionality of a relation
R on a class A.
1.35. Theorem. Mostowski Collapsing Theorem.
If R is a well-founded set-like relation that is extensional on A
then there is a unique transitive class
U and a unique isomorophism s : (A,R) --> (U,\in).
1.36. Corollary. If U, U' are transitive
classes such that \in is well-founded on either of them and (U,\in)
is
isomorphic to (U',\in) then U = U'
and the isomorphism is the identity map.
1.37. Proposition. If (R,A) is a set-like well-ordering
then R is extensional on A.
1.38. Proposition. If (R,A) is a set-like well-ordering
then there is a unique transitive class U and a unique
isomorphism s : (R,A) -->
(U,\in). In this case U is a transitive class well-ordered under \in.
1.39. Defintion. A transitive set that is well
ordered under \in is called an ordinal.
F: Basic properties of ordinals.
1.40. Proposition. Let A be a transitive
class well-ordered under \in.
(a) every element of A is
an ordinal. In particular every element of an ordinal is an ordinal.
(b) any proper initial segment
of A is an element of A.
1.41. Proposition. (a) If x,y are ordinals then
x \in y or x = y or y \in x
(b) Let
On = the class
of all ordinals
Then On is
transitive and well-ordered under \in
Also, On is
unique, i.e. if A is any transitive proper class well-ordered under \in then
A = On.
(c) On is a proper class.