Abstract
The need for modifying axiomatic set theories was caused, in particular, by the development of category theory. The ZF and NBG axiomatic theories turned out to be unsuitable for defining the notion of a model of category theory. The point is that there are constructions such as the category of categories in naïve category theory, while constructions like the set of sets are strongly restricted in the ZF and NBG axiomatic theories. Thus, it was required, on the one hand, to restrict constructions similar to the category of categories and, on the other hand, adapt axiomatic set theory in order to give a definition of a category which survives restricted construction similar to the category of categories. This task was accomplished by promptly inventing the axiom of universality (AU) asserting that each set is an element of a universal set closed under all NBG constructions. Unfortunately, in the theories ZF + AU and NBG + AU, there are toomany universal sets (as many as the number of all ordinals), whereas to solve the problem stated above, a countable collection of universal sets would suffice. For this reason, in 2005, the first-named author introduced local-minimal set theory, which preserves the axiom AU of universality and has an at most countable collection of universal sets. This was achieved at the expense of rejecting the global replacement axiom and using the local replacement axiom for each universal class instead. Local-minimal set theory has 14 axioms and one axiom scheme (of comprehension). It is shown that this axiom scheme can be replaced by finitely many axioms that are special cases of the comprehension scheme. The proof follows Bernays’ scheme with significant modifications required by the presence of the restricted predicativity condition on the formula in the comprehension axiom scheme.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
K. Kuratowski and A. Mostowski, Set Theory (PWN, Warsaw, 1968; North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1968; Mir, Moscow, 1970).
J. L. Kelley, General Topology (Van Nostrand, New York, 1955; Nauka, Moscow, 1968).
E. Mendelson, Introduction to Mathematical Logic (Van Nostrand, Princeton, N. J., 1964; Nauka, Moscow, 1971).
S. Eilenberg and S. MacLane, “General theory of natural equivalences,” Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 58, 231–294 (1945).
S. MacLane, “Locally small categories and the foundations of set theory,” in Infinitistic Methods (Proceedings of Symposiumon Foundations of Mathematics, Warsaw, 1959) (PWN, Warsaw; Pergamon, Oxford, 1961), pp. 25–43.
C. Ehresmann, “Gattungen von lokalen Strukturen,” Jahresber. Deutsch. Math. Verein. 60, 49–77 (1957).
P. Dedecker, “Introduction aux structures locales,” in Colloque e de géometrie différentielle globale, Bruxelles, 1958 (Centre Belge Rech. Math., Louvain, 1959), pp. 103–135.
J. Sonner, “The formal definition of categories,” Math. Z. 80, 163–176 (1962).
P. Gabriel, “Des catégories abéliennes,” Bull. Soc. Math. France 90, 323–448 (1962).
V. K. Zakharov, “Local set theory,” Mat. Zametki 77(2), 194–212 (2005) [Math. Notes 77 (2), 177–193 (2005)].
V. K. Zakharov, E. I. Bunina, A. V. Mikhalev, and P. V. Andreev, “Local theory of sets as a foundation for category theory and its connection with Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory,” J. Math. Sci. (N. Y.) 138(4), 5763–5829 (2006).
A. N. Kolmogorov and A. G. Dragalin, Mathematical Logic (KomKniga, Moscow, 2006) [in Russian].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Original Russian Text © V. K. Zakharov, A. D. Yashin, 2011, published in Matematicheskie Zametki, 2011, Vol. 90, No. 1, pp. 70–86.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zakharov, V.K., Yashin, A.D. Finite axiomatizability of local set theory. Math Notes 90, 64 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1134/S000143461107008X
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S000143461107008X