Definition of a function in NBG set theory

In summary: The only difference is that in NBG you can have proper classes, which are not sets, as function arguments. So, in summary, the main difference between ZFC and NBG set theory is that NBG allows for the creation of class comprehensions and the use of proper classes as function arguments.
  • #1
echinuz
1
0
Hi,
I have a situation where I want to define a function over all possible rings. For example, I would like to define a function that accepts a ring as an input and returns its additive identity. However, this seems impossible to do in ZF set theory since we can not define the domain of this function. In other words, we can not generate the set {x:isring(x)} since the axiom of separation requires us to restrict x to some set S, {x \in S:isring(x)}. In this case, we would need S to be the set of all sets which is forbidden. However, this sort of action does seem permitted in NBG set theory since class comprehensions allow us to create the class of all rings {x:isring(x)}. Assuming this is correct, we return to our original problem which was to define a function whose input is a ring. What is a function is NBG set theory? In ZF set theory, we typically define a function as a relation between two sets that has certain properties. What is the analogy with classes? Is there a good reference for these sort of constructs?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
echinuz said:
Hi,
I have a situation where I want to define a function over all possible rings. For example, I would like to define a function that accepts a ring as an input and returns its additive identity. However, this seems impossible to do in ZF set theory since we can not define the domain of this function. In other words, we can not generate the set {x:isring(x)} since the axiom of separation requires us to restrict x to some set S, {x \in S:isring(x)}. In this case, we would need S to be the set of all sets which is forbidden. However, this sort of action does seem permitted in NBG set theory since class comprehensions allow us to create the class of all rings {x:isring(x)}. Assuming this is correct, we return to our original problem which was to define a function whose input is a ring. What is a function is NBG set theory? In ZF set theory, we typically define a function as a relation between two sets that has certain properties. What is the analogy with classes? Is there a good reference for these sort of constructs?
You can define a class function in ZFC. Since NBG is a conservative extension of ZFC, you will get the same results.

In your example, you just define a class function from the class of rings to the class of sets. Afaik, functions are defined the same way in ZFC and NBG.
 

FAQ: Definition of a function in NBG set theory

What is a function in NBG set theory?

In NBG set theory, a function is a mathematical operation that assigns a unique output for each input. This means that for every element in the domain of the function, there is exactly one corresponding element in the codomain.

What are the components of a function in NBG set theory?

A function in NBG set theory is composed of a domain, codomain, and a rule or definition that maps elements from the domain to the codomain. The domain is the set of all possible inputs, the codomain is the set of all possible outputs, and the rule defines how the inputs are mapped to the outputs.

How is a function represented in NBG set theory?

In NBG set theory, a function is usually represented as f: X → Y, where f is the name of the function, X is the domain, and Y is the codomain. This notation is read as "f maps from X to Y". The rule or definition of the function is usually written after the notation.

What is the difference between a function and a relation in NBG set theory?

While both functions and relations in NBG set theory involve mapping elements from one set to another, the main difference is that a function has a unique output for each input, whereas a relation may have multiple outputs for a single input. In other words, a function is a special type of relation that follows the one-to-one mapping rule.

Can a function have an empty domain or codomain in NBG set theory?

No, a function in NBG set theory cannot have an empty domain or codomain. This is because a function must have at least one input and one output. If either the domain or codomain is empty, then the function would not be well-defined and therefore cannot exist.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
903
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top